On Friday 24 January 2014 11:42:24 Wayne Merricks wrote:
> FYI, looks fine to me. I use thunderbird and my phone. I've known
> Outlook and the various iDevices to mangle things beyond recognition if
> thats what you're viewing it on.
I can confirm that it is messed up here reading with an old km
On Friday 24 January 2014 11:42:24 am Wayne Merricks wrote:
> I've known Outlook and the various iDevices to mangle things beyond
> recognition if thats what you're viewing it on.
Outlook is one of the worst e-manglers I've ever run across.
( *painful* memories of spam-o-matic ( dot com ) devel
FYI, looks fine to me. I use thunderbird and my phone. I've known
Outlook and the various iDevices to mangle things beyond recognition if
thats what you're viewing it on.
Regards,
Wayne Merricks
The Voice Asia
On 24/01/14 16:06, Cowboy wrote:
On Friday 24 January 2014 11:03:06 am Cowboy wr
On Friday 24 January 2014 11:03:06 am Cowboy wrote:
> On Friday 24 January 2014 10:30:17 am Fred Gleason wrote:> On Jan 24, 2014,
> at 08:47 23, Cowboy wrote:> > > Who, in their right mind,
> would produce a piece of > > **professional** equipment that *deliberately*
> introduces> > harmonic di
On Friday 24 January 2014 10:30:17 am Fred Gleason wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2014, at 08:47 23, Cowboy wrote:
>
> > Who, in their right mind, would produce a piece of
> > **professional** equipment that *deliberately* introduces
> > harmonic distortion ?
>
> Because it sounds good!
>
> (“Good” bein
On Jan 24, 2014, at 08:47 23, Cowboy wrote:
> Who, in their right mind, would produce a piece of
> **professional** equipment that *deliberately* introduces
> harmonic distortion ?
Because it sounds good!
(“Good” being, in this context, a more-or-less completely subjective,
‘aesthetic’ judge
- Original Message -
From: "Cowboy"
Who, in their right mind, would produce a piece of
**professional** equipment that *deliberately* introduces
harmonic distortion ?
The makers of guitar fuzzboxes. Been that way for about 50 years.
I forget where I read
On Friday 24 January 2014 08:45:00 am Chris Howard - CBR wrote:
> Some cuts have hum and other artifacts that would be nice
> to lose if it could be done without blood, sweat and tears.
"Relatively" easy in production.
Almost impossible with just an in-line processor.
--
Cowboy
http://cowboy.
On Thursday 23 January 2014 08:50:52 pm Jay Ashworth wrote:
> The *Compellor* does that?
> I had always heard that that was what the *Exciter* did; that was it's
> raison d'etre from introduction...
You may be right. It's been a while.
Looking at the Aphex site today, I can't find it, on either
Thanks for all of the good information.
My content is almost all home-recorded readings of classic
books. You can try some out at librivox.org.
So there are level problems and audio problems in a lot of the cuts.
For one-piece cuts I can cull out bad stuff but for larger
works where there were
- Original Message -
> From: "Cowboy"
> On Thursday 23 January 2014 07:47:40 pm Jim Stewart wrote:
> > Otherwise my vote is an Aphex Compeller, that I think can be "slowed
> > down" enough to give the processing you desire.
>
> Just be aware that the Compellor deliberately generates
> ev
On Thursday 23 January 2014 07:47:40 pm Jim Stewart wrote:
> Otherwise my vote is an Aphex Compeller, that I think can be "slowed down"
> enough to give the processing you desire.
Just be aware that the Compellor deliberately generates
even order distortion !
The theory is that even order di
I think ideally you need a "simple and slow" AGC-like compressor that has a
"side-chain gate" so that it can be adjusted so it doesn't "pump up" the level
during silence periods that are "supposed" to exist in spoken word.
I don't know what kind of "Radio" station you are running, but you likely
13 matches
Mail list logo
