HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kjs@gvgspd.GVG.TEK.COM (Kevin J. Shuholm)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: Hotel California solo: who's playing?
Date: 12 Aug 92 19:57:28 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley  CA

In article <1992Aug11.184802.18487@col.hp.com> pws@col.hp.com writes:
>Kevin,
>You recently wrote:
>
>> On the studio version, one person may have played both parts, but on
>> their live album it would have been impossible.  The harmony parts sound
>> like two guitars to me, but I don't know h who played them.
>
>This assumes that all guitarists sound alike.
>If you've listened to enough electric guitar work, you would know that
>BB King sounds different from Eric Claption who sounds different from
>Duane Allman, etc...
>
>-Paul Schwotzer

I was talking about the harmony duet part of the song (as that's all
that came to mind when I read the original post) and all that I was
saying is that it could have been played by one person in the studio,
but live that would have been impossible.  I don't know who played which
part.  

Where did I assume that all guitarists sound alike?  And what does that
have to do with this post?  I do know the difference between a Duane
Allman slide lead and Eric Claptons sound (and yes, I have some old
recordings of them playing acoustic tunes together).  In fact, listening
to different guitarists sound is something I enjoy, although I haven't
spent time figuring out which Eagles guitarists sounded like what.  Ask
me about Lynyrd Skynyrd's 3 guitarists though and I could go on for days.
I guess I'm digressing a bit, but ....

Kevin
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers,rec.antiques
From: chaban@fortsc.enet.dec.com (Ed Chaban)
Subject: Re: Looking for info on Brinsmead pianos
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 12 AUG 92 14:34:45 PST


I noticed the author wanted replies by mail and hit the wrong key and sent
an unfinished reply.

Well, I'm sorry but I might as well supply some information.  

You can find serial numbers and dates of manufacture for most pianos in
Pearce' Piano Atlas.  This book is published yearly and available from
most piano supply houses.

BTW, Brinsmead's earliest listing is serial # 22600 in 1860.

-Ed

Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: platt@watson.ibm.com (Daniel E. Platt)
Subject: Re: Hotel California solo: who's playing?
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 23:05:48 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1991@gvgspd.GVG.TEK.COM>, kjs@gvgspd.GVG.TEK.COM (Kevin J. Shuholm) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug11.184802.18487@col.hp.com> pws@col.hp.com writes:
|> >Kevin,
|> >You recently wrote:
|> >
|> >> On the studio version, one person may have played both parts, but on
|> >> their live album it would have been impossible.  The harmony parts sound
|> >> like two guitars to me, but I don't know h who played them.

Having figured out the two individual parts (as well as the double parts, but
that's another story), I can say that there are two players on the album version.

The first voice is a straight distorted guitar.  The second guitar voice comes in
after the first voice ends on a stretch of the G string from an E to an F# at the
9th fret.  The second voice is distorted with some flange or phase-shifter, and
seems to be thinner -- perhaps it was a strat.  Not only is the voice different,
but the way the riff is fingered feels distinctly different, with a lot more
movement up and down the neck (sliding between positions more; not spending much
time in any one position, etc).  Knowing Joe Walsh's other work, I would guess
the second voice was his.

|> >
|> >This assumes that all guitarists sound alike.
|> >If you've listened to enough electric guitar work, you would know that
|> >BB King sounds different from Eric Claption who sounds different from
|> >Duane Allman, etc...
|> >
|> >-Paul Schwotzer
|> 
|> I was talking about the harmony duet part of the song (as that's all
|> that came to mind when I read the original post) and all that I was
|> saying is that it could have been played by one person in the studio,
|> but live that would have been impossible.  I don't know who played which
|> part.  
|> 
|> Where did I assume that all guitarists sound alike?  And what does that
|> have to do with this post?  I do know the difference between a Duane
|> Allman slide lead and Eric Claptons sound (and yes, I have some old
|> recordings of them playing acoustic tunes together).  In fact, listening
|> to different guitarists sound is something I enjoy, although I haven't
|> spent time figuring out which Eagles guitarists sounded like what.  Ask
|> me about Lynyrd Skynyrd's 3 guitarists though and I could go on for days.
|> I guess I'm digressing a bit, but ....
|> 

Actually, even if the discussion *had* been about whether there was only one
guitar on the album version, I could say that I hadn't realized how different
the styles were between the two guitarists until I worked on figuring
out how they were played.  The two melodies and vocalizations sound very
similar; the fingering styles are very different.  

The double guitar part is just arpegios.  Could have been double tracked
by one, but likely was played the way they performed it.

|> Kevin

Dan
From: daver@felix.filenet.com (Dave Richards)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: Whatsitcalled?
Date: 18 Aug 92 01:53:55 GMT
Reply-To: daver@fritz.filenet.com (Dave Richards)
Organization: Costa Mesa, CA

>In article <1992Aug6.232700.453@glv.uucp>, zack@thunder (Zack) writes:
>|>What is the correct term to use when describing a device that can split the  
>|>ranges of an audio signal (typically a song) and single them out? They are
>|> used at radio stations to make remixes and rap artists for sampling. 

In article <1992Aug13.224435.9547@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> g_house@goes11.enet.dec.com (Greg House) writes:
>You mean like a crossover (to split a signal into seperate outputs based
>on the frequency range)?  Or maybe an Equalizer could be used for this.

Technically, whether going by the name crossover, equalizer, or whatever,
the device is a filter.  The common filter functions are:

	High-pass
	Low-pass
	Notch
	Bandpass

In case it's not obvious from the names, the high-pass filter attenuates
(blocks) low frequencies and allows the higher ones to go through unaffected.
The low-pass does the opposite.  The threshold at which the cutoff occurs 
could either be adjustable, or set by the designer.  The notch filter allows
high or low frequencies through while blocking frequencies within a par-
ticular range.  The bandpass filter is the opposite of a notch filter.  It
allows a range of frequencies to pass through, while blocking frequencies
outside the desired range.

The various filter functions are implemented in devices at the component
level.  You can buy a piece of audio gear that contains filters, but you
can't just go to the stereo store and ask for a notch filter for example.
The salesman probably wouldn't know what you were talking about.  The
common crossover for speakers that the previous poster mentioned is one
example of a high pass filter.  It goes between the amp and the tweeter,
protecting it from the low frequencies which it can't reproduce.

The graphic equalizer, which is common in home and auto stereo systems, is
simply a group of bandpass filters (typically 5 or more), with a gain con-
trol on each one.  Sliding the controls up and down changes the level of
amplification of frequencies within those ranges, but does not change the
frequency range that band covers.

Dave
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: dickw@IASTATE.EDU (Richard Wallingford)
Subject: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Reply-To: dickw@IASTATE.EDU (Richard Wallingford)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:17:25 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.130236.13195@dale.ksc.nasa.gov>,
sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov (Steve Davis) writes:

>Personally, I'd prefer almost any acoustic piano (even one in marginal  
>condition, as long as it holds a tune) to an electronic; the sound, feel, 
>and presence of a digital piano is just not there, IMHO.  

If you search long and hard enough, you can buy a second hand piano
for under $2500 which has an adaquate feel and tone.  Then you
must pay about $75 per month to keep it in tune and maintained.  
I can't stand playing a piano that isn't in near-perfect tune.  
I agree that there is nothing like playing a concert grand that is 
in perfect tune, but of all the acoustic pianos I've played in my 
life in venues, houses, etc., only a couple were very 
enjoyable.  Either the action isn't adjusted quite right, it's out 
of tune, or it's fallen into disrepair.  In fact, I'll go so far as
to say that I've only played *one* piano in my life that I felt was in 
perfect tune ( that was my first piano instructor's grand that I only
got to play when I'd "mastered" a piece).  When I go to someone's
house I never want to play their piano because I'm 99.9% sure that
it's going to suck and sound like some 1840's bar-room upright.

As for live performance I'll take my MKS-20, SC-55 and Rhodes 
(weighted controller) any day over a miked acoustic.  It takes
a genius (well not quite -- but somebody you have to pay a lot) 
to make an acoustic piano sound good in a live performance with 
a jazz/blues group.  I've made that mistake more than once; the piano's
natural tone gets lost in the mix and it usually is on the verge of
feedback in the effort to get it loud enough.
 
>That being said, 
>I do find the current generation of digital pianos to be great fun... 

They are fun.  I especially like inverting the velocity curve and
modulating the transpose with my footpedal.

--
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dick Wallingford      | Internet: dickw@iastate.edu                 |
|Center for NDE        | Packet  : wd0anb@n0an.ia.usa.na             |
|Iowa State University | "This river don't go to Aintree" - S.H.     | 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: soh@gdstech.grumman.com (Scott O'Hare)
Subject: Re: guitar conference
Reply-To: soh@gdstech.UUCP (Scott O'Hare)
Organization: Grumman Data Systems-Woodbury
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:42:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.1505.9508@execnet> "david villano" <david.villano@execnet.com> writes:
>Please excuse my ignorance.  Im wondering if there is strictly a guitar
>conference.  Music.makers is cool and has much info for guitarists,
>however, I would rather just hang in a guitar conference.  If anyone
>knows of one that I can get to through Exec-net please let me know how I
>can get to it.  I've read in previous messages about alt.guitar but I
>have no idea how to get there.. Thank for the help
>--
>Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
>International ILink Host

PLEASE POST REPLIES!!

soh

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
- Scott O'Hare (soh@gdstech.grumman.com)                            -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: mason@dante.uucp (Mason Jones)
Subject: Re: Digital Audio Tape Multi-trackers
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 21:40:03 GMT
Organization: Charnel House Prod.

PRAMAN@KGNVMA.VNET.IBM.COM (Ankan K. Pramanick) writes:
: 
: Does anyone have any updates on Tascam's plans to introduce an 8-track
: digital recorder (possibly using VHS cassettes), such as date of release,
: suggested price, specs., mixer info. (included/not), etc.? I heard that such
: a unit was in the works, and scheduled for a late '92 release, at a lower
: price than Alesis' $3000+ 8-mm based ADAT 8-tracker. Also, how about
: experiences with the Alesis ADAT unit? Any input will be appreciated.

You've got the media backwards.  The ADAT uses the S-VHS tapes, and
the Tascam will reportedly use the 8mm tapes.  I've yet to see any
information about the Tascam one regarding price and features, which
isn't a good sign as regards hopes of seeing one soon.  I imagine given
the publicity the ADAT has been getting that if Tascam had enough done
to show sample units they would be doing so.  Hence I would guess that
we won't be seeing the Tascam available until next spring or summer.


  VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
             Mason Jones           Charnel House Productions
             P.O. Box 170277, San Francisco 94117-0277 U.S.A.
   ...{uunet,sun}!hoptoad!dante!mason   or   dante!mason@hop.toad.com
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
From: ibanez@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: MIDI SOFTWARE FOR THE INCREDIBLY INGNORANT
Date: 12 Aug 92 23:34:31 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

   I am completely ignorant to the world of midi, but I just bought a little
Yamaha QY10 sequencer and was wondering:

1. What kind of midi software is good for PC clones?

2. What kind of cost am I looking at?


I guess what I'm looking for is the capability to save songs on disc,have 
staffs-for one or more tracks on screen, and maybee the ability to use windows
for placing notes and rests and numerous other things on the 'sheet' via mouse.
Yes, I am this unfamiliar with midi and its software. Also, do I need any
kind of midi card?


Jamie
 
    _   ___
   / `-'  (               III          FINALLY, I OWN MY ULTIMATE BASS!
   |( II   ||||||||||||||[***]             1978 MusicMan Stingray
   \_.-.__(                l                  Thanks Leo (R.I.P)
From: burd@hydra.unm.edu (Stephen Burd ASM)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Date: 13 Aug 92 19:50:59 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Aug12.204457.19141@leland.Stanford.EDU> termite@leland.Stanford.EDU (David Paik) writes:
>
>How many people out there who have said that digital pianos sound bad
>compared to real pianos listened to them through a decent source
>(eg high quality studio monitors and not the little built in speakers
>and not even a good home stereo or a keyboard amp)?

I have to agree wholeheartedly with this assessment of much of the perceived
difference between acoustic and electric pianos.  I've seen heard many apples
and oranges comparisons between a $2000 all-in-one electric piano and a 
godd acoustic grand piano.

I played acoustics for years but switched to an electric after a few too
many cross country moves.  My current setup is a Kurzweil 1000 PX+, Yamaha 
KX88, Peavy DECA 524 stereo power amplifier (250 watts/channel), and a 
pair of Peavy 308S studio monitors.  The acoustic quality of this setup 
is excellent due to a good stereo sample combined with clean sound 
reproduction.  

There are still things that I miss from an acoustic piano (e.g. the string
shift of a grand piano with the damper pedal depressed and the extra
harmonics produced when the sustain pedal is depressed).  But for me, the 
loss of these is more than offset by the price differential between my
setup (+/- $4000 new) and a good quality grand piano (at least $15,000).
There's also the extra uses for the electric toys and the wear and tear
on your back (or moving budget) to consider.
-- 
FROM:      Stephen D. Burd			AT&T:      (505)-277-6418
USNAIL:    Anderson School of Management        FAX:       (505)-277-7108
           University of New Mexico		INTERNET:  burd@hydra.unm.edu
           Albuquerque, NM  87131
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: koen@cv.ruu.nl (Koen Vincken)
Subject: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 11:00:24 GMT
Organization: University of Utrecht, 3D Computer Vision Research Group

In <1992Aug13.184746.29711@hpcvusn.cv.hp.com> bw@hpcvxgmr.cv.hp.com (Bill Wilhelmi) writes:

>In summary:
>
>   Reasons to get a Digital Piano (keyboard, synthesizer, whatever):
>
>     1. You need an instrument that stays in tune no matter where you
>	go.
>
>     2. You have been unable to rely on a decent-sounding piano to be
>	available wherever you practice or perform.
>
>     3. You can't afford a good acoustic piano.
>
>     4. You like the other sounds you can play on a keyboard.
>
>     5. The keyboard has a reasonably good-sounding piano setting.
>
>     6. You need a portable instrument.
>
>     7. You can also afford to get a sound system and mixer.
>	(Some electric/digital pianos come with built-in speakers.)
>
>  
>   Reasons to get an acoustic piano:
>
>     1. The type of music you perform demands the "real thing".
>
>     2. A decent, tuned piano is available wherever you expect to
>	perform.  You don't really need a portable instrument.
>
>     3. Your ears demand the "real thing".
>
>     4. You have the money to get a good piano.
>
>     5. If you play keyboards at all, you should have a good 
>	acoustic piano.
>
>Did I miss anything?  Anyone care to add to the lists?

Another one in favour of the digital piano:

	8. You wants to play at any time of the day without bothering
	   your neighbours (or even your partner -- depends on your level ;-)

In fact, this is one of the reasons for me to buy one. The apartment I live in
can be real `noisy'.

	Koen


    /   /                      Koen Vincken, AZU E 02.222, Heidelberglaan 100, 
   /  /    _  /  ___/   \   / 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands. 
  /  \    /  /  _/    /  \ / e-mail: koen@cv.ruu.nl, 
__/  _\ ____/ ____/ _/   _/ phone: +31-30-506710/506711
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: cliffw@sequent.com (Cliff White)
Subject: re: Octapad, got info thanx
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 17:49:39 GMT


I now have some neat explainations, and a set of working
triggers - thanx to all who responded, i will email
a summary to all who asked.
-- 
cliffw

'When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro'- HST
From: ckkwan@acsu.buffalo.edu (Chunming Kenneth Kwan)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Midi Time Piece II
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:14:42 GMT
Organization: UB

I've seen a lot of advertisement for Mark of the Unicorn's Midi Time
Piece II, has anyone actually been able to try one yet (I was told there
seems to be some problem with shipment and delivery)?  Could anyone tell me
how MTP II would compare to Epcode's Studio 4?  If you don't mind sending me
your ideas by e-mail, I'll post a summary of sort later.  Thanks!

Kenneth Kwan
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: larry@bach.udel.edu (Larry Larraga)
Subject: Re: SansAmp: any opinions ?
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:04:09 GMT

It sounds like a miked up amp to me.  Works great in conjunction with
my Boss SE-50.  Marshall, Boogie, Twin...  Less filling, too!  I'd
get the rack mount version if I was buying today.  Those little DIP
switches on the floor model are mildly annoying.

Caveat:  You plug it into a mixing console - either recording or
reinforcement.  It's not for going into a guitar amp.  It was
designed to replace an amp & speaker cab.
-- 
Larry Larraga	University of Delaware Microcomputing Resource Center
Senior Analyst	040 Smith Hall  Newark, Delaware  19716  (302) 831-8895
Internet:  	larry@brahms.udel.edu 

Newsgroups: rec.music.makers,rec.antiques
From: chaban@fortsc.enet.dec.com (Ed Chaban)
Subject: Re: Looking for info on Brinsmead pianos
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 12 AUG 92 14:14:23 PST


In article <1992Aug12.155235.9410@thinkage.on.ca>, kpmartin@thinkage.on.ca
(Kevin P. Martin) writes..."> 
>Does anyone have any information on how good this piano might be
>(once repaired -- some parts are in rough shape), how old it might
>be (the serial number appears to be 13806), or any information about
>the company?
> 
>Please reply via e-mail. Thanks in advance.
>		-Kevin Martin, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
>		 kpmartin@thinkage.com    kpmartin@thinkage.on.ca
From: "david villano" <david.villano@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: guitar conference
Date: 12 Aug 92 10:40:08 EST
Reply-To: "david villano" <david.villano@execnet.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Executive Networks Information

Please excuse my ignorance.  Im wondering if there is strictly a guitar
conference.  Music.makers is cool and has much info for guitarists,
however, I would rather just hang in a guitar conference.  If anyone
knows of one that I can get to through Exec-net please let me know how I
can get to it.  I've read in previous messages about alt.guitar but I
have no idea how to get there.. Thank for the help
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: patti@hosehead.intel.com (Patti Beadles)
Subject: Re: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Originator: patti@hosehead
Organization: Intel Corp., Hillsboro, OR
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:08:25 GMT

One advantage that I've found to having a digital piano is that I can
use the different voices available to hear imperfections in my own
playing.  In particular, if I think a piece I'm playing sounds very
even, and I flip over to the harpsichord sound, I often hear flaws
that were "invisible" with the piano tone.
-- 
Patti Beadles  503/696-4358 | I don't speak for Intel, nor vice-versa.
   patti@hosehead.intel.com |
   75555.767@compuserve.com | Practice random kindness and
or just yell, "Hey, Patti!" |                  senseless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: johns@uuisis.isis.org (john smith)
Subject: Moog Taurus
Organization: International Shared Information Service (Ottawa)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 13:54:32 GMT

Hi. I've just gotten a Moog Taurus bass pedal. It's kinda beat up and needs 
some cleaning but it works well.. What is the value of this thing?
        It's the original one that most progressive rock groups used and 
it's kinda fun to program sounds like the one Rush uses for Tom Sawyer
(you know.. the bbbbzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyyyyy).. Anyone has some settings i could 
use because the thing is kinda funny to set ... You know, i'm not familiar 
with old synthesizer jargon...
John@uuisis
From: piz@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (G G ZIPFEL)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Date: 17 Aug 92 18:48:42 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

Richard Wallingford writes:
>Steve Davis writes:
>
>>Personally, I'd prefer almost any acoustic piano (even one in marginal  
>>condition, as long as it holds a tune) to an electronic; the sound, feel, 
>>and presence of a digital piano is just not there, IMHO.  
>
>If you search long and hard enough, you can buy a second hand piano
>for under $2500 which has an adaquate feel and tone.  Then you
>must pay about $75 per month to keep it in tune and maintained.  

	This brings up a question in my mind. My parents have
	a very nice piano (or at least it was very nice at one time)
	which is now in need of some serious work. About how much
	would it cost to have new ivory put on the keys, and
	have the whole thing restrung/tuned?

	Would it be worth it, or would it be better to buy a new one?


	Do piano services come to your house, or do you have to 
	move the things out and in again?


-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          Zip                  |   Owner/GM West Chicago Zippers,           
Steelers in 92, Bubby's Back!  |   Obviously the funniest team in the IBL.   
"Anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it"
From: stevek@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Steve Kauder)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:42:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: acoustic pianos versus digital pianos/keyboards
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO