Safe gear temps

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109473957.602824.49500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Does anyone know offhand what the range of safe room temperatures (in
> F, please) is for studio gear?
>
It varies with the equipment, but typically 40 degrees to 120 degrees if
the equipment is in use, the range for storage is considerably wider. Note
that this doesn't take humidity into account, and the higher the humidity,
the more narrow the usable temprature range. If you bring your gear in to a
warm area from a cold area, always let it set for a couple of hours before
plugging it in and turning it on so that any condensation that the
temperature change might have caused has a chance to evaporate.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Porky" <noham@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4WbUd.35735$Rl5.14959@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1109473957.602824.49500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Does anyone know offhand what the range of safe room temperatures (in
> > F, please) is for studio gear?
> >
> It varies with the equipment, but typically 40 degrees to 120 degrees if
> the equipment is in use, the range for storage is considerably wider. Note
> that this doesn't take humidity into account, and the higher the humidity,
> the more narrow the usable temprature range. If you bring your gear in to a
> warm area from a cold area, always let it set for a couple of hours before
> plugging it in and turning it on so that any condensation that the
> temperature change might have caused has a chance to evaporate.
>
>

I know any number of consoles and hardware devices that would probably
fry at a 100 degree *room* temperature. That could put the inside of some
mixers and processors in the 130 degree (plus) range.

I think this is going to be require some more 'specifics' as to what type of
gear we're talking about... but I personally wouldn't go anywhere near a
120 degree room, to heck with the equipment !

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Just a general question, no specific gear in mind.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109637181.414399.223600@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> But 100% of Jesusland uses oF!

**Nope. Scientists and others have used Metric for decades. Even in the US.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:WwQUd.31941$Tt.16238@fed1read05...
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:38ht7oF5ls5ouU4@individual.net...
>>
>> "Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1109637181.414399.223600@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> > But 100% of Jesusland uses oF!
>>
>> **Nope. Scientists and others have used Metric for decades. Even in the
> US.
>
> I buy Cokes in one 1/2 liter bottles now. I count my fat grams. I state my
> weight in kilos so I don't seem so fat. However, I draw the line at
> measuring Mr. Happy in centimeters - I prefer a larger scale on principle.

**You could measure "Mr Happy" in Microns.

BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1109637153.117259.215710@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Just a general question, no specific gear in mind.
>

OK then, if the ambient temperature in a room where one of my favorite
consoles sits, or in the room where the power supplies sit... were to hit
120 degrees, it (they) would be dead in a matter of hours. Same is true
with a great deal of hardware processors, both tube and solid state.
There are a number of quality reverbs and other single space processing
gear that cannot be racked without leaving space for air flow between them.

The console I refer to is almost 30 years old and is full of small transformers,
relays and other coils. Running with a room temperature in excess of 80
degrees would be asking for potential trouble.... and that would still make
parts of the surface and interior of the desk in the high 90's.

Even some of the best consoles are equipped with what people term
120 degree capacitors - they aren't expected to operate inside a room
which is itself 120 degrees.

I think all I am trying to do here, is lodge a slight disagreement with an
acceptable room temperature that might exceed 90 degrees if you have
any equipment at all that generates it's own heat.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

> **Nope. Scientists and others have used Metric for decades. Even in
the US.

Sorry, I was kidding, and I was probably too flippant. I'm from the
Midwest, and we don't see too much in oC out here. I agree with you,
metric makes more sense.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
newssRUd.48341$uc.6478@trnddc08...
>
> "Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109637153.117259.215710@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Just a general question, no specific gear in mind.
> >
>
> OK then, if the ambient temperature in a room where one of my favorite
> consoles sits, or in the room where the power supplies sit... were to hit
> 120 degrees, it (they) would be dead in a matter of hours. Same is true
> with a great deal of hardware processors, both tube and solid state.
> There are a number of quality reverbs and other single space processing
> gear that cannot be racked without leaving space for air flow between
them.
>
> The console I refer to is almost 30 years old and is full of small
transformers,
> relays and other coils. Running with a room temperature in excess of 80
> degrees would be asking for potential trouble.... and that would still
make
> parts of the surface and interior of the desk in the high 90's.
>
> Even some of the best consoles are equipped with what people term
> 120 degree capacitors - they aren't expected to operate inside a room
> which is itself 120 degrees.
>
> I think all I am trying to do here, is lodge a slight disagreement with an
> acceptable room temperature that might exceed 90 degrees if you have
> any equipment at all that generates it's own heat.
>

When I was in the Army, back in the late sixties, we had sensitive
electronic diagnostic tube equipment that had to be kept at an ambient temp
of 56 degrees F, it went out of calibration at about 60F, but is was far
more sensitive than even the most esoteric audio electronics, and lives
depended on it's proper functioning. I've seen studio recording equipment
(including tube-type equipment) used to record live concerts at well over
100F, without malfunction, again, the key to keeping it working is adequate
ventilation.
In a studio enviornment, however, anyone who can afford the equipment can
afford the air conditioning to keep it at reasonable temps, so it would be
foolish to keep and use expensive equipment in a non-enviornment controlled
room. Personally, I recommend keeping your studio at between 65 and 75 F, it
will be more comfortable for you, the musicians, and the equipment. I
certainly wouldn't want to work in a studio at 90F, but iof the music was
good enough, I wouldn't hestiate to use my stuff to record it even if it was
90F! :-)

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:38i3avF5psptqU4@individual.net...
>
> > BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
> > correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.
>
> According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as with
> litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from the
> French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
> quart.
>
Wait a minute, a liter is 33.8 ounces, making it heavier than a quart.
(Check your coke bottle, Jim. :-)). You pronounce it "lee-ter", not
"lee-tree", so Jim is right, "liter" is the correct spelling. We also go to
a theater, while the British go to a theatre. My spell checker accepts both
spellings as being correct, so I guess it really doesn't mattre. :-)

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Porky" <noham@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_4TUd.38209$Rl5.11686@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
> news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...
> > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:38i3avF5psptqU4@individual.net...
> >
> > > BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell
Litre
> > > correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.
> >
> > According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
with
> > litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from
the
> > French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
> > quart.
> >
> Wait a minute, a liter is 33.8 ounces, making it heavier than a quart.
> (Check your coke bottle, Jim. :-)).

Wrong! You measure quarts in ounces, but you measure liters in millilters.
There are 32 ounces in a quart, but 1000 milliliters in a liter. Therefore,
a quart must be lighter than liter (32<1000). It's just like a meter is
longer than a yard. You have 36 inches in a yard, but you have 100
centimeters in a meter (100>36).

It's the ease of math that makes the metric system so widely popular.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Porky" <noham@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:8ISUd.38199$Rl5.11832@bignews4.bellsouth.net...

> Try recording a live outdoor concert in July in the deep south, when the
> temp is about 112 and the humidity is over 90%, you'll probably break down
> before the equipment does. :-)

You don't even need to go that far south...try a folk festival in Missouri
in August. Sizzle. (But the Studer never quit.)

Peace,
Paul

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 06:04:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com>
wrote:

>"Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
>news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05
>> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:38i3avF5psptqU4@individual.net...
>>
>>> BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell
>>> Litre correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.
>>
>> According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as
>> with litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First,
>> it's from the French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is
>> "lighter" than a quart.
>
>I wish the U.S. Governement would get off their butts and legislate us into
>100% metric. I was involved in the failed attempt at metrification in the
>1970s, and still think it was a very good idea.
>
>AFAIK, the only people using the old English measurement system are us and
>some countries in darkest Africa. Is hanging onto this awkward antique of a
>system a form of protectionism or what?
>

It would certainly solve the problem of your under-sized gallons.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:ksRUd.31946$Tt.154@fed1read05...
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:38i3avF5psptqU4@individual.net...
>
>> BTW: While you're switching to Metric, see if you Yanks can spell Litre
>> correctly. The rest of the planet manages to do so.
>
> According to Google, there are five times as many sites with liter as with
> litre. Americans won't go with litre for two reasons: First, it's from the
> French and second, it helps us remember that a liter is "lighter" than a
> quart.

**You Americans have short memories, doncha? Without the French, you would
still be British subjects.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Logan Shaw wrote:
> Unfortunately, I think we are actually going backwards in this area.
> When I was a kid in school in the 1970's, they taught us as much or
> more metric stuff as they did imperial units. Apparently, they have
> actually backed off from this and only teach some metric in science
> classes. Which is, of course, totally stupid in my opinion.
>
> - Logan

And you get situations such as, the airliner filled in pounds of fuel,
when the driver thinks he's getting kilos, or the Mars destined
spaceship, on which Newton/metres and foot/pounds have been confused.
There is a link between these two, and it is "SPLAT!"

It does take time, and education, to achieve the change. The UK is on
the way, with many things converted, about the only thing left in
OFFICIAL use is the mile. People have been prosecuted for selling
vegatables in pounds.

Oh, and of course, we all still use a "non-metric" hour, minute & second!

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Nat" <natjordan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1109647902.336868.273980@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> **Nope. Scientists and others have used Metric for decades. Even in
> the US.
>
> No offense meant. I only kid, and I agree that metric makes way more
> sense.

**NP


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Andrew Chesters" <andrew.dontspam.chesters@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:38k33mF5p7h1vU1@individual.net...
> Logan Shaw wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I think we are actually going backwards in this area.
>> When I was a kid in school in the 1970's, they taught us as much or
>> more metric stuff as they did imperial units. Apparently, they have
>> actually backed off from this and only teach some metric in science
>> classes. Which is, of course, totally stupid in my opinion.
>>
>> - Logan
>
> And you get situations such as, the airliner filled in pounds of fuel,
> when the driver thinks he's getting kilos, or the Mars destined spaceship,
> on which Newton/metres and foot/pounds have been confused. There is a link
> between these two, and it is "SPLAT!"
>
> It does take time, and education, to achieve the change. The UK is on the
> way, with many things converted, about the only thing left in OFFICIAL use
> is the mile. People have been prosecuted for selling vegatables in
> pounds.
>
> Oh, and of course, we all still use a "non-metric" hour, minute & second!

**Not so. The MKS (Metre, Kilogramme, Second) system is so named, because
time is part of the system.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Trevor Wilson wrote:
> "Andrew Chesters" <andrew.dontspam.chesters@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:38k33mF5p7h1vU1@individual.net...
>
>>Logan Shaw wrote:
>>
>>>Unfortunately, I think we are actually going backwards in this area.
>>>When I was a kid in school in the 1970's, they taught us as much or
>>>more metric stuff as they did imperial units. Apparently, they have
>>>actually backed off from this and only teach some metric in science
>>>classes. Which is, of course, totally stupid in my opinion.
>>>
>>> - Logan
>>
>>And you get situations such as, the airliner filled in pounds of fuel,
>>when the driver thinks he's getting kilos, or the Mars destined spaceship,
>>on which Newton/metres and foot/pounds have been confused. There is a link
>>between these two, and it is "SPLAT!"
>>
>>It does take time, and education, to achieve the change. The UK is on the
>>way, with many things converted, about the only thing left in OFFICIAL use
>>is the mile. People have been prosecuted for selling vegatables in
>>pounds.
>>
>>Oh, and of course, we all still use a "non-metric" hour, minute & second!
>
>
> **Not so. The MKS (Metre, Kilogramme, Second) system is so named, because
> time is part of the system.
>
>
I accept it is part of the system, I didn't think I would need to put
:-) after THAT statement. ;-) Still, it would be a giggle to try and
change it all again to get 100 whotsits in a thingy, a hundred of which
equal a day.

Never heard it called MKS before, it it a 'Down-Under' thing?

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Trevor Wilson wrote:
> "Andrew Chesters" <andrew.dontspam.chesters@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:38k6c2F5o5tvcU1@individual.net...
>
>>Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>
>>>"Andrew Chesters" <andrew.dontspam.chesters@ntlworld.com> wrote in
>>>message news:38k33mF5p7h1vU1@individual.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Logan Shaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Unfortunately, I think we are actually going backwards in this area.
>>>>>When I was a kid in school in the 1970's, they taught us as much or
>>>>>more metric stuff as they did imperial units. Apparently, they have
>>>>>actually backed off from this and only teach some metric in science
>>>>>classes. Which is, of course, totally stupid in my opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Logan
>>>>
>>>>And you get situations such as, the airliner filled in pounds of fuel,
>>>>when the driver thinks he's getting kilos, or the Mars destined
>>>>spaceship, on which Newton/metres and foot/pounds have been confused.
>>>>There is a link between these two, and it is "SPLAT!"
>>>>
>>>>It does take time, and education, to achieve the change. The UK is on
>>>>the way, with many things converted, about the only thing left in
>>>>OFFICIAL use is the mile. People have been prosecuted for selling
>>>>vegatables in pounds.
>>>>
>>>>Oh, and of course, we all still use a "non-metric" hour, minute & second!
>>>
>>>
>>>**Not so. The MKS (Metre, Kilogramme, Second) system is so named, because
>>>time is part of the system.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I accept it is part of the system, I didn't think I would need to put :-)
>>after THAT statement. ;-) Still, it would be a giggle to try and change
>>it all again to get 100 whotsits in a thingy, a hundred of which equal a
>>day.
>>
>>Never heard it called MKS before, it it a 'Down-Under' thing?
>
>
> **I doubt it. We learned it in school in the late 1960s.
>
>
Ahh, I was living in the still Imperial colonies in the late '60s.
Didn't come back to Blighty until "the winter of discontent" and the
three day week...

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9x4Vd.2513$SQ4.1615@fe1.texas.rr.com...

> If metrification is ever going to succeed, there is going to need
> to be a MASSIVE public education campaign. People need to have an
> intuitive idea of how to use measurement units.

Trying to explain the measurements it why it failed. This country has had no
trouble with two liter bottles of soda, counting grams of carbs, or using
megabytes, kilobytes or gigabytes. They watch the Olympics and deal with
everything being measured in meters. Why? Because it is what it is.

This country tried to switch by using dual measurements, which provided zero
benefit. Who is going to learn what a liter is if everyone keeps comparing
it to another measurement? When people buy gas, they either fill it up or
put in some dollar amount. They will catch on rather quickly. In a lot of
the country distance is measured in time, not miles. People say, "the store
is 20 minutes away" or "the beach is a six hour drive away."

But the biggest reason is that it really won't make a difference in their
everyday lives. If you're not converting among the various scales, the
metric system has no intrinsic advantage. It some ways metric is less
friendly - take ordinary measurements around the house. Most people go down
to 1/8", sometimes to 1/16". The millimeter is too fine and more difficult
to read in my opinion, but not overly so. I see no advantage to it and some
minor disadvantages.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Trevor Wilson wrote:
> **I don't believe so. I think it is an education thing. It is a big job to
> convert a nation to Metric. Even here, where we began our switch to Metric,
> back in the 1970s, many items are still Imperial. Plumbing fittings,
> automobile tyres (yet every screw, nut and bolt in cars was Metric as far
> back as 1976)

I forget which it is, but there is on oddball nut in my Toyota Corolla
that's a 3/8" or something. Everything else is metric, but I guess I
have to have some use for those other sockets I have.

> and, of course, the biggie: DIL integrated circuit hole
> spacings. Funnily enough, the stuff which changes fastest are the things we
> use every day. Distance measurements, automobile speeds, temperature
> measurements and fluid measurements. I still can't remember how many kilo
> Pascals I need to feed into my car tyres. I know it's 34 PSI though.

That's exactly the kind of education that is needed! When I was in
school, the spent all this time teaching me how to convert from one
to another, which is nice (although pretty useless now that I've
discovered /usr/bin/units -- available on most Unix and Linux systems).

I don't know how many kilopascals it would be either, although I do
remember my high school chemistry teacher complaining that physicists
have to make everything complicated, so why couldn't they just make
a kilopascal exactly 1/100 atmospheres instead of something really close
to 1/100. (Looking it up, 101.325 kilopascals equals one atmosphere.)
Also, one atmosphere is about 15 psi, I think. So, 34 psi should
intuitively be about 230 kilopascals to make a rough guess. (I would
guess 233 for 35 psi, since that's 8/3 atmospheres, so for 34, I'll
round down to 230.) Checking with my favorite /usr/bin/units again,
it seems that 34 psi is 234.4 kilopascals.

And the more typical 32 psi is about 220 kilopascals. Which is easy
to remember because you just ask yourself "How many kilopascals am
I going to put in these tires?", and then you answer, "220, 221,
whatever it takes."

> The US
> is big enough and has a large enough manufacturing base to not worry too
> much about it. I guess that's why you never changed. Too hard, for not much
> (obvious) return.

Well, we are slowly changing. My mom once asked me what liter was,
and I asked her if she had a "two-liter" of Coke in the cabinet. She
said "yeah", and I said, "well, it's half that big". The point is,
we already have lots of products that are based on metric, and the
number seems to be slowly growing larger. Eventually we'll have a
two-system system where you'll have to know both, and then maybe there
will be an urge to simplify that down to a one-system system, and
hopefully the fact that basically all other countries use metric will
swing it in favor of metric.

However, I think it'll be a long time before architecture changes.
We are still using "two by four" pieces of wood, even though they
are not even 2" by 4" any longer. And there are zillions of people
that know design and drafting and structural engineering and
construction, and they all use feet and inches and pounds, and
their tools use those units too, and they build out of raw material
that comes in those sizes. So, given how much it costs to build an
office building or something, who's going to want to be the first
organization to have a metric building built?

- Logan

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:38k8g0F5nlaukU4@individual.net...
>
> > I accept it is part of the system, I didn't think I would need to put
:-)
> > after THAT statement. ;-) Still, it would be a giggle to try and change
> > it all again to get 100 whotsits in a thingy, a hundred of which equal a
> > day.
> >
> > Never heard it called MKS before, it it a 'Down-Under' thing?
>
> **I doubt it. We learned it in school in the late 1960s.

So did we, in the USA. There are actually *two* metric systems in common
use, the cgs system (centimeters-grams-seconds) and the MKS
(meters-kilograms-seconds). Chemists use the former, physicists the latter.
More confusion.

By the way, the thing in the Mad magazine pictures was a poiuyt.

Potrzebie,
Paul

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:38kd7sF5oshqoU4@individual.net...

> **Spoken like a woodworker. The rest of us consider mm far too coarse a
> measurement. Having said that, I grew up in a world of Imperial
> measurements. When selecting (say) a drill bit, I had to think real hard
on
> which was larger - 1/8th inch or 9/64th inch. I don't even need to think
for
> more than a millisecond about 3mm or 3.3mm. I KNOW which is larger
> instantly.

LOL! Wood is about the only thing I measure. Sometimes I will use cm/mm, but
more often than not I actually find inches and fractions easier. Go figure.
I agree with you about the tools, though. I'm pretty quick and finding the
common denominator, but nothing is simpler than mm.

> BTW: Cm is the most commonly used measurement in most Metric nations. It
is
> a useful size for most common measurements around the home. Builders
almost
> always specify measurements to the nearest mm. There are rarely mistakes
> when using such systems.

By the time I get around to cutting something, my margin of error is about
1/8" anyway, so why would I need a finer scale? :-)

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> wrote in message
news:1T7Vd.36881$Tt.17265@fed1read05...
> "Trevor Wilson" <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
> news:38kd7sF5oshqoU4@individual.net...
>
>> **Spoken like a woodworker. The rest of us consider mm far too coarse a
>> measurement. Having said that, I grew up in a world of Imperial
>> measurements. When selecting (say) a drill bit, I had to think real hard
> on
>> which was larger - 1/8th inch or 9/64th inch. I don't even need to think
> for
>> more than a millisecond about 3mm or 3.3mm. I KNOW which is larger
>> instantly.
>
> LOL! Wood is about the only thing I measure. Sometimes I will use cm/mm,
> but
> more often than not I actually find inches and fractions easier. Go
> figure.
> I agree with you about the tools, though. I'm pretty quick and finding the
> common denominator, but nothing is simpler than mm.
>
>> BTW: Cm is the most commonly used measurement in most Metric nations. It
> is
>> a useful size for most common measurements around the home. Builders
> almost
>> always specify measurements to the nearest mm. There are rarely mistakes
>> when using such systems.
>
> By the time I get around to cutting something, my margin of error is about
> 1/8" anyway, so why would I need a finer scale? :-)

**See? I can spot a woodworker a km away.

:-)

I'm still finding my way with wood, so I always set my tools up to the
nearest mm. Accuracy is around 0.25mm.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

georgeh wrote:
> "Jim Carr" <jim@azwebpages.com> writes:
>
> >"Logan Shaw" <lshaw-usenet@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
> >news:6g7Vd.2993$SE2.1741@fe2.texas.rr.com...
>
> >> So basically, it's my contention that "liter" is the American
English
> >> spelling of the word.
>
> >Dictionary.com says that litre is "chiefly British" so I would
disagree. You
> >have to admit it violates the standard spelling rules. I wouldn't
drive my
> >old beatre with the heatre on and park at a parking metre, but not
put in
> >any coins because I am a cheatre, now would I?
>
> My grandmother's house was on Centre St. in Boston. That's in New
England!

Then you'd be drivin' the beatah with the heatah on and, if you
could find one, you'd pahk wheah theah's no pahkin' metah, cuz
them infuhnal machines'd gip you outah a quatah every time.
Uthuhwise, you'd just be a retahd and a loozah.

Archived from groups: alt.music.home-studio,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Paul Stamler wrote:
> There are actually *two* metric systems in common use, the cgs system
> (centimeters-grams-seconds) and the MKS (meters-kilograms-seconds).
> Chemists use the former, physicists the latter. More confusion.

Only confusing maybe for people not using the (one) system. Overhere in
Europe, where we actually live by it, a centimeter is another way of
saying 1/100th meter, like a kilometer is 1000 meters, and a kilogram is
1000 grams. That's obviously the main selling point of the metric system.

Luck, Arjan

--
"There's a reason mixing seems so simple; it IS simple" - G. Massenburg
----------------Where I'm from: http://www.soundbyte.nl----------------
--------To email personally go to the website - lower left menu--------