good Scott Dorsey article in Recording this month

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

another classic from Mr. Dorsey... a new kind of distortion
measurement. check it out....

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

In article <znr1092916429k@trad>, Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>In article <6c38b64b.0408182038.327e2b30@posting.google.com> genericaudioperson@hotmail.com writes:
>
>> another classic from Mr. Dorsey... a new kind of distortion
>> measurement. check it out....
>
>Hasn't the GedLee measurement already been discussed and dismissed
>here a while back?

It was discussed here. I don't think anyone but Phil dismissed it.
It's certainly not perfect, and I doubt you will ever see it on data
sheets, but it's a step in the right direction.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cg28iv$pid$1@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <znr1092916429k@trad>, Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
> >In article <6c38b64b.0408182038.327e2b30@posting.google.com>
genericaudioperson@hotmail.com writes:
> >
> >> another classic from Mr. Dorsey... a new kind of distortion
> >> measurement. check it out....
> >
> >Hasn't the GedLee measurement already been discussed and dismissed
> >here a while back?
>
> It was discussed here. I don't think anyone but Phil dismissed it.
> It's certainly not perfect, and I doubt you will ever see it on data
> sheets, but it's a step in the right direction.

There's a paper in the newest JAES offering another new distortion
measurement that criticizes the GedLee method pretty severely.

Peace,
Paul

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

Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.comwaht> wrote:
>tell me the GedLee measure ment has nothing to do with Rush

No, different Geddes and Lee. Or do you mean that conservative guy with
the RE-20?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

Paul Stamler <pstamlerhell@pobox.com> wrote:
>"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
>>
>> It was discussed here. I don't think anyone but Phil dismissed it.
>> It's certainly not perfect, and I doubt you will ever see it on data
>> sheets, but it's a step in the right direction.
>
>There's a paper in the newest JAES offering another new distortion
>measurement that criticizes the GedLee method pretty severely.

That's another step in the right direction!
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

Neil wrote:

>"Mondoslug1" <mondoslug1@aol.comwaht> wrote in message
>news:20040819114158.26045.00001938@mb-m28.aol.com...
>> tell me the GedLee measure ment has nothing to do with Rush
>
>No, the GeddyLee distortion measurement (another widely-regarded unit of
>measurement that you are apparently thinking of) only pertains to
>frequencies above 75 Khz. The most common reference chart is found below:
>
>- Makes Dogs roll over repeatedly while trying to cover ears with paws =
>1-2 GeddyLee's
>- Knocks Bats right out of the sky = 3-4 GeddyLee's
>- Interferes with microwave TV transmissions = 5-6 GeddyLee's
>- Causes the Sun to reverse on it's rotational axis = 7-8 GeddyLee's
>
>No case for anything above 8 GeddyLee's has ever been postulated, as at
>that point the world as we know it, would end anyway.
>--

Hey thanks for clearing that up Neil!

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

In article <c38f11eb.0408192009.32c8943d@posting.google.com> chrisdec@swbell.net writes:

> i was wondering what the sonic differences between the gold re-20 and
> my matte grey one are . . . fatter bottem end perhaps?

Maybe fatter bottom LINE.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo