Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Waves Trans-X WOW!!
| Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68008] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 15:16  |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ore errors
>> that
>> slower ones? They have to write data just like CD burners do.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> "Aaron Allen" <nospam@not_here.dude> wrote:
>>>Whether or not I can hear anything, here is all the proof I need: My car
>>
>>>deck is slowly making it's way to the graveyard. Faster burns won't play
>> in
>>>it. Slower ones do. That says to me w/o any doubts that the faster burns
>> are
>>>either mishapen (more elliptical) or they have higher errors or both.
>>>I burn 'em slow for masters.
>>>
>>>AA
>>>
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:44808fe2$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> I can't.
>>>>
>>>> "DC" <dc@spamyermama.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>When prepping CDs for duplication
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68009 is a reply to message #68008] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 15:27  |
John [1]
Messages: 2229
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I usually burn slower, at 4X or 8X,
>> but
>>>>>>I think that's largely superstition.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It's not. Most people can clearly hear the difference between a
>>>>>CD written at 24 or higher and one written at 4 or lower.
>>>>>
>>>>>DC
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
>>>http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>You are absolutely the best, DJ.
1. 3 x RME HDSP PCI cards and 4 x UAD-1 cards will overload the PCI bus when
all the cards are used with a Magma.
Also, after smoking an entire eighth of high test British Columbia ganja,
pounding a bottle of tequila, an popping two tabs of E, it's a bad idea to
drive tanker trucks full of jet fuel, call your ex-girlfriend, or practice
a trapeze act.
Thus we end today's episode of The Totally Flippin' Obvious ;-)
TCB
"DJ" <animix_spam-this-ahole_@animas.net> wrote:
>As I have been pushing this hybrid DAW harder and harder, I've been finding
>out a lot of important things.
>
>1. 3 x RME HDSP PCI cards and 4 x UAD-1 cards will overload the PCI bus
when
>all the cards are used with a Magma
>
>2. 1 x RME HDSP card and 4 x UAD-1 cards will overload the PCI bus when
all
>the cards are used with a Magma.
>
>3. Inserting 3 x RME HDSP cards in an ASUS A8V-Deluxe mobo and having one
>card share an IRQ with an AGP Matrox P750 will work just fine if you enable
>bus mastering on the Matrox P750. If bus mastering on the Matrox is
>disabled, the system will be unusable. This one had me by the short hairs
>for a while. It didn't seem to make sense to have the Matorx mastering the
>bus when sharing with an audio card, but this is absolutely necessary for
>this situation to work properly.
>
>4. It's a good idea, when using 4 x UAD-1 cards in a Magma to just pull
the
>top off the Magma and have a big fan blowing down into the chassis so they
>won't overheat..........because they will, if you don't............no shit.
>
>5. It doesn't hurt to get one of those freezer packs, freeze it and put
it
>under your RME HDSP Multiface breakout box because these things get damned
>hot after 4 hours of cranking AD/DA through them when using them with
>external processors in a mix.
>
>6. When mixing, the Lucid GenX6 WC is a very good workhorse and much less
>problematic than the Mytek because there are no thermal issues. The Mytek
>Ste
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68011 is a reply to message #68008] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 15:41 |
justcron
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
this just happens to be the brand
we use where I work.
TCB
"Brandon" <you@your.domain> wrote:
>
>All,
>
>I know a few of you have made your own computer enclosures with soundproofing
>design to quiet the control room.
>Do any of you still have the plans you used?
>I am interested to see your designs and hear from you how they worked. I
>am fixing to build a new control room desk and was going to incorporate
a
>computer enclosure in the bottom of it.
>Thanks,
>
>BrandonJamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>I checked out the second one, the drummer's right. Seems like he could
>have chosen more convincing sounds (you sure that wasn't a TD10?), but
>since the MIDI tracks are available drum sample replacement should be no
>prob. Or maybe he likes those sounds, who knows. As long as the client
>is happy.
Yeah, they're very happy. Like I said, I've got a couple
of suggestions that I think might make them even happier, but
I'm certainly not gonna push it. These guys don't care if
something sounds real or not real or from outer space; they
just want it to sound like they want it to sound... you should
hear the third song (which I'll post once we get it in the
ballpark - it's kinda interesting); it's got a sample from a
movie, a sample from "Aqualung", two sections with some
effected white noise underneath a spooky narrative of parts of
a Robert Frost poem... I've worked with a couple of bands like
this (meaning bands that are kinda into "weird") in the past,
and I've found that you pretty much have to throw convention
out the window, because they've got a certain vision as to how
t
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68012 is a reply to message #68010] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 15:54 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hey want the *whole thing* to come across, as opposed to
the: "we need to make my guitars sound totally rad", and "dude,
my drums have to sound HUGE!", approach.
So, in situations like this band, I'll make suggestions & let
them hear some different options, but I never really push the
issue except if something is really bothering me or if I find
it grating.
For example, I'm going to try one more time to see if they'll
be amenable to dropping the vocal level in the harder sections
of "What This", because I think it's a bit too hot, and also
could use just a touch of ambience - even something as small as
a closet... or a shoebox; it's utterly too dry in those
sections, IMO; so maybe after listening to it for a couple of
days, they'll agree to it, but if they're reluctant, I'll leave
the issue alone. There's no way I'm going to have them saying
later: "Damn, I wish we hadn't let Neil talk us into that".
So, even though you don't get to play "producer" in these kinds
of sessions, I find they can be fun... it's a challenge to help
them come up with "wierd". LOL Like the e-bow part on "Bitch
Liberte" - that was my idea... Danny (the lead guitarist) had a
similar, picked, riff that he wanted to put there, and it was
coming across "ok", then I noticed that the other guitarist had
an E-Bow sitting in his goodie bag, so I said: "Hey why don't
you try that part with the E-bow?", so he modified the riff a
bit so he could do it on the e-bow, and they all LOVED it.
Same thing with the solo on that song... he had one more or
less worked out, but when he laid it down & listened back, he
wasn't too thrilled, but wasn't sure what he wanted to do to
change it, so I copied pasted some sections of it in a
different order, flipped one part around in reverse (the little
bit right at 2:46), and bingo! Just weird enough! lol
Stuff like the subtle little inhale/exhale right before the
quiet part in "What This" took the singer several attempts at
the mic, plus a long crossfaded edit, to get just the way they
wanted it, and doing ten or twelve takes of feedback just to
get the right feel might bother some people, but I think it's
kinda fun, and just another part of the process for this kind
of music. These guys are meticulous in
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68018 is a reply to message #68016] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 21:51 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
evidence that comes from from listening. In the end there must be
a test and an explanation of the phenomenon, but we always
devise these tests to explain something we hear that we cannot
currently measure.
Those who tell themselves it is not there because their test did
not show it, could be right of course, or they could also be wrong,
in which case they are much worse off for having trained
themselves not to hear reality.
DCDJ wrote:
> No activity here in so long. Is everyone just waiting to see who will
> notice this first and say something about it?.............it's a game,
> right?
>
>
I think everyone's busy trying multiband compression mastering in PARIS ;)Thanks Guys!!!
I will let you know how it comes out.
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>First, if you check out http://www.quietpcusa.com/ and their intro page
>
> http://www.quietpcusa.com/articles/how_to_silence_a_computer .html
>
>doing nothing more than half of what's on that page will help a lot. It
won't
>make something silent but it will be awfully close. For truly silent computing
>I recommend a Cat5 KVM box. This one is a hardware unit for under $900
>
>http://www.42u.com/raritan-kx101.htm
>
>and they can be had for a good bit less, this just happens to be the brand
>we use where I work.
>
>TCB
>
>"Brandon" <you@your.domain> wrote:
>>
>>All,
>>
>>I know a few of you have made your own computer enclosures with soundproofing
>>design to quiet the control room.
>>Do any of you still have the plans you used?
>>I am interested to see your designs and hear from you how they worked.
I
>>am fixing to build a new control room desk and was going to incorporate
>a
>>computer enclosure in the bottom of it.
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Brandon
>"Don Nafe" <dnafe@magma.ca> wr
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68024 is a reply to message #68018] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 23:11 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
y narrative of parts of
> a Robert Frost poem... I've worked with a couple of bands like
> this (meaning bands that are kinda into "weird") in the past,
> and I've found that you pretty much have to throw convention
> out the window, because they've got a certain vision as to how
> they want the *whole thing* to come across, as opposed to
> the: "we need to make my guitars sound totally rad", and "dude,
> my drums have to sound HUGE!", approach.
>
> So, in situations like this band, I'll make suggestions & let
> them hear some different options, but I never really push the
> issue except if something is really bothering me or if I find
> it grating.
>
> For example, I'm going to try one more time to see if they'll
> be amenable to dropping the vocal level in the harder sections
> of "What This", because I think it's a bit too hot, and also
> could use just a touch of ambience - even something as small as
> a closet... or a shoebox; it's utterly too dry in those
> sections, IMO; so maybe after listening to it for a couple of
> days, they'll agree to it, but if they're reluctant, I'll leave
> the issue alone. There's no way I'm going to have them saying
> later: "Damn, I wish we hadn't let Neil talk us into that".
>
> So, even though you don't get to play "producer" in these kinds
> of sessions, I find they can be fun... it's a challenge to help
> them come up with "wierd". LOL Like the e-bow part on "Bitch
> Liberte" - that was my idea... Danny (the lead guitarist) had a
> similar, picked, riff that he wanted to put there, and it was
> coming across "ok", then I noticed that the other guitarist had
> an E-Bow sitting in his goodie bag, so I said: "Hey why don't
> you try that part with the E-bow?", so he modified the riff a
> bit so he could do it on the e-bow, and they all LOVED it.
> Same thing with the solo on that song... he had one more or
> less worked out, but when he laid it down & listened back, he
> wasn't too thrilled, but wasn't sure what he wanted to do to
> change it, so I copied pasted some sections of it in a
> different order, flipped one part around in reverse (the little
> bit right at 2:46), and bingo! Just weird enough! lol
>
> Stuff like the subtle little inhale/exhale right before the
> quiet part in "What This" took the singer several attempts at
> the mic, plus a long crossfaded edit, to get just the way they
> wanted it, and doing ten or twelve takes of feedback just to
> get the right feel might bother some people, but I think it's
> kinda fun, and just another part of the process for this kind
> of music. These guys are meticulous in an interesting sort of
> way... little noises that other artists might want edited out,
> these guys want left in sometimes, a pitch issue on a vocal
> might be "ok" in one section ("No, no, don't fix it... leave
> it - it sounds cool there!"), but "not OK" in others ("Lemme do
&
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68025 is a reply to message #68018] |
Wed, 10 May 2006 23:11 |
Music Lab Sweden
Messages: 12
Registered: January 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
gt; another take on that." "That's not very far off, want to see if
> Auto-Tune will take care of it?", "No, not that one, lemme do
> it again"). So, it's different, and I think some recordists
> might find it frustrating, but I find it interesting.
>
> NeilCall me nutty, but once you correctly identify any note, then the fact that
you answer successive notes correctly in the same "testing session" only
proves that you have great RELATIVE pitch. But if you can fire up the
program, get the first note right, then come back day after day and
consistently get the FIRST note right, then you have perfect pitch. I might
be wrong but, it seems that great RELATIVE pitch might be the bigger
blessing, anywho.
This thread reminded me of a college roommate of mine who does have perfect
pitch. My freshman year, a guy that lived down the hall from us would burst
into our room early in the morning, strum a chord on his guitar, and ask,
"Mario, what chord was that?"
Mario who had been awakened by the guitarist entrance would, without
hesitation or even opening his eyes, answer (for example) "E flat 9 #11" and
tell you the note order (voicing) of the chord. He never missed. One night
a guy that was visiting our room squeaked out a fart. We all looked at
Mario. He said it was between and E and an F. We checked it on against a
guitar that was nearby. He was right.
Keep up the ear-training exercises, Kim.
CLAre Wires XP only?
Bjorn R
"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4483401a$1@linux...
>
> What uses do you have for wires? Below are a couple.
>
>
> Input Wire receives audio from other channels or plugs
>
> Output Wire sends audio to other channels or plugs. It passes through
audio
> to the channel it is instantiated on AND also sends it to a virtual wires
> channel. Other plugs such as Key Gate can receive this audio signal and
> use it for processing.
>
>
> I've used it to route Aux FX back to strips for added EQ and Panning etc.
> ie: chorus on an acoustic 12 string guitar panned to the opposite side
>
> I've also tried sending all the drums to two Aux (via the Aux send) then
> returning the two Aux to two strips (a cheezy drum buss) via wires.
>
> It's to bad Paris's architecture doesn't allow jumping between
submixes....now
> that could be fun.
>
> using wires can help...set Aux 1 send to post - put a "wires out" on that
> Aux and a "wires in" to a free channel, put that channel into record mode
> and record away
>
> I'm pretty sure that will capture everything
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C68839.03E01B90
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Steve,
I was lucky enough to front the Tubes when they played here in Boston=20
just after their prime in the mid 80s.
No Fee but great just the same. Heroes of mine.
Tom
"stev
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68029 is a reply to message #68025] |
Thu, 11 May 2006 08:09 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
nd at that point I have
to make a guess. If all notes were in the same octave then yes you'd be right,
though I suspect that with all twelve semitones I, at least would still get
confused at times.
>This thread reminded me...
I had a bizaare moment last night where, ten minutes after soing some perfect
pitch training, my phone beeped telling me I had an SMS. I went "That's an
F!!". Checked, and was right.
>Keep up the ear-training exercises, Kim.
I refuse not to win this one. ;o)
Cheers,
Kim."Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>Are you sure you really want perfect pitch? Not me, jeez, I have to
>throw away half of my favorite records. :)
I know what you're saying. Aaron pointed out the other week that it frustrates
him when stuff is flat or sharp. I met a girl a few months ago who had perfect
pitch and was saying it was a mixed blessing for a number of reasons.
However, while I could be wrong, I can't help but think that, well, I guess
I'd be amazed if it was able to warp the way I hear things that I've heard
a hundred times before. Obviously the notes would become clear, so that would
change, but, for example, a nice bend in a blues solo... surely that would
still sound nice.
Sure, there's the odd tune that's been recorded half a semitone flat or sharp,
and they may be frustrating at times, but honestly, how bad can it really
be?
I know one thing's for sure... my piano in the lounge which is flat a semitone
will have to be retuned... ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.Anyone got any good shots of Paris to make a nice background. The more intense
the better. 1280 x 1024 would be fine"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.org> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>>My point is that you can't take a faulty instrument and extrapolate from
>it
>>how non-faulty gear will work.
>
>That wasn't your point. Your point was that the discs written at
>different speeds are identical. They are not.
Nonsense, I have written more than once that different write speeds will
produce different error reports. The question then become if that matters,
since errors appear in printed CDs as well, so some accomodations were made
for errors in the first place. So I said something completely different than
this.
>>My point was
>>that any correctly working burner will produce errors that are statistically
>>and audibly meaningless, at whatever speed is being used.
>
>
>And having heard the difference I can say that you are wrong.
>I cannot say which writers produce errors at what speed, but I
>can tell you that it happens and it is most certainly audible.
>
>Most recently, the master from my live session was duped at 48x
>on a Microboards CD duplicator. Sounded awful. To everyone.
>Slower sounded better. To everyone. You cannot account for this
>evidence so you dismiss it. Ok.
That's not the kind of evidence I'm looking for. We all know that our perceptive
hardware is imperfect. Witnesses routinely identify the wrong person in lineups,
illusions of movement can be created with surround sound, etc and so on.
So the entire basis of scientific inquiry is to try to establish facts that,
as much as possible, take our perceptive apparatus out of the equation. If
there is a fault in my test tell me what it is and I'll see if I can come
up with a better one. And, as I've repeatedly said, if someone can do blind
ABY tests and show a statistically significant result I'll be happy to revisit
the issue.
>>So, if Don or someone else can produce repeatable
>>double blind test
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68030 is a reply to message #68025] |
Thu, 11 May 2006 08:13 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
s in which the fast burned CD can be ABY picked with
statistically
>>significatn variance from the expected 50/50 result, I'll get interested
>>again.
>
>
>It's like the 1db cut at 1250 that dropped the vocal right in the
>track. You don't have to hear it, and I do not wish to convince you
>if you can't hear it. You're not the client.
Actually it's not like that at all, what we're trying to establish is if
the speed of burning a CD degrades the audio or degrades the quality of the
data. That's a question that should have a (provable) yes or no answer. People
can disagree about whether the 1db cut should be at 1250 or if it should
be 2db at 1400 and both be right, but the issue at hand should be provable
>I might do the double blind test as an article at one point if I think
>I can produce something people would want to read.
I thinnk that's an excellent idea.
>What I reject out of hand is the practice of coming up with some
>test and telling others, including some very experienced and capable
>engineers that they are fooling themselves. Now, I don't mind the
>implied insult nearly as much as the loss of important data and
>evidence that comes from from listening. In the end there must be
>a test and an explanation of the phenomenon, but we always
>devise these tests to explain something we hear that we cannot
>currently measure.
>
>Those who tell themselves it is not there because their test did
>not show it, could be right of course, or they could also be wrong,
>in which case they are much worse off for having trained
>themselves not to hear reality.
>
>DC
I'll skip over the implied insult that I'm willfully deaf and don't understand
how audio (and other kinds of) data works and await either a better test
than the one I used or proof that goes beyond 'everyone hear the difference'
when there would be obvious pressure to agree with that fact.
TCBI dated a girl who had absolute pitch, and she could do the same thing. It
was useful for me back then because I was trying to become Grant Green and
if I couldn't get a chord (single lines are a lot easier) I'd ask her and
she'd do the same thing. She was also a very good violinist (turned down
an Eastman school scholarship to go to Yale) and if anything thought her
pitch made playing and listening to music LESS fun for her. As in she had
a hard time digging Chet Baker because he was so flat all the time.
Ah, lovely youth. I once spent a morning in bed with her drinking mimosas
and listening to Glen Gould's Goldberg Variations . . .
TCB
"Chris Latham" <latham_c@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>Call me nutty, but once you correctly identify any note, then the fact that
>you answer successive notes correctly in the same "testing session" only
>proves that you have great RELATIVE pitch. But if you can fire up the
>program, get the first note right, then come back day after day and
>consistently get the FIRST note right, then you have perfect pitch. I might
>be wrong but, it seems that great RELATIVE pitch might be the bigger
>blessing, anywho.
>
>This thread reminded me of a college roommate of mine who does have perfect
>pitch. My freshman year, a guy that lived down the hall from us would burst
>into our room early in the morning, strum a chord on his guitar, and ask,
>"Mario, what chord was that?"
>Mario who had been awakened by the guitarist entrance would, without
>hesitation or even opening his eyes, answer (for example) "E flat 9 #11"
and
>tell you the note order (voicing) of the chord. He never missed. One night
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68036 is a reply to message #68030] |
Thu, 11 May 2006 11:43 |
Music Lab Sweden
Messages: 12
Registered: January 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
ld be convinced after the fact that they _did_
hear something.
>
>>All of which is only to say that I don't trust even my own perceptions
and
>>memory as being perfect or anything close to it. So if someone says to
me
>>'these two thing sound different' and I flip the phase on the file and
it
>>cancels perfectly I guess the problem is my perception, I'm not about to
>>override what I consider proof.
>
>
>Unless, like I said, the phenomena is being generated somewhere you
>are not looking. In which case, you are being silly in telling someone
>it is not there.
>
>
>>You obviously think differently, which is
>>fine, we're Americans and we're still allowed minor freedoms like the right
>>to disagree about sensory proof.
>
>
>Oh-hey, we're even allowed to disagree about the definition of
>adequacy in Thad's testing criteria. What a country!
>
>
>>In any case, now we're on to CD players. Obviously they will sound different--different
>>electronics, connections, motherboards, and so on. But you're arguing that
>>playing CDs made at different speeds will actually sound different on the
>>same CD player. Assuming the player works, I still don't buy it, because
>>if the errors are sufficiently high to be perceivable then the disk should
>>get spit out as a bad disk.
>
>
>Or not. How do you know? Perhaps the threshold of audible
>degredation is higher than the "spit out" threshold?
>
>Do you know? Anyone tested this?
>
>Looks like an area for further research to me...
>
Well, I've already done that research which is why I'm pretty confident about
this. Of course, because I don't agree with you you assume I'm a uninformed
idiot, like everyone else who has ever disagreed with you. Here's a short
summary of how CD error correction works.
http://www.ee.washington.edu/conselec/CE/kuhn/cdaudio2/95x7. htm
I read much more complex descriptions of CIRC and the red book about two
years ago. I also had a computer geek buddy with more programming skill than
me sit down and go over some of it. The basis of the interest was not audio
CDs per se but why data error correction was so much more robust than audio
error correction. (by the way, your description of hard drives and CDs being
wildly different is wildly wrong, very similar schemes are used and hard
disk write errors and bad sectors are suprisingly common, which is why the
error correction for data is both deeper and wider). The error _correction_
is designed to take a pretty fair number of errors for almost 2.5 mm on the
disk. It can't be completely blank but it can be pretty bad. The correction
will get vanishingly close to bit for bit correct. We tested this by editing
.iso images of audio CDs with a hex editor or with, believe it or not, Perl.
Burning the images with the errors and then ripping the files would generate
an audio file that matched perfectly to the original.
Longer runs of errors means the CD players start to interpolate, and this
is where the believers always make their final stand. There were two things
we found fairly surprising when we made CDs with enough errors that we're
pretty sure the drives were interpolating. Our first discovery was that the
interpolation was mathmatically surprisingly good, so I wondered if we were
hearing a lot of interpolation and not knowing it.
It was then that I remembered something that I did back in the good old days
when I still played a lot of physical CDs. Sometimes, when I had a (comercial,
printed) CD that was skipping or not playing in my fairly finicky car CD
player, I would rip it, burn it to a CD-R and it would play fine in the car
again. Then I rememberd a time when I had a copy of Mule Variations by Tom
Waits that got a massive scuff on it, and worse yet the scuff was in track
4, Hold On, my favorite song on the record. In my CD players it would just
stick zz-zz-zz-zz-zz-zz-zz-zz-zz. All of them. Not wanting to pay for a CD
twice I took a flier and tried to rip the disk. I couldn't make an ISO of
it, that failed. But I _did_ manage to rip to .
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68162 is a reply to message #68036] |
Sat, 13 May 2006 13:23 |
Bill Lorentzen
Messages: 140
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ey say that
>there is 12 times the amount on oil in Alberta than there is in Saudi Arabia.
> The oil men used to say back in 1965 that the day the oil sands are useable,
>oil will be at $5.00 a barrel! They use to think it was a joke, but now
>they say it is cost effective and the grade is much better than the oil
from
>the middle east. They heat the oil sands and spin the oil out of the sands.
> They said they could fuel the worlds oil needs for the next 200 plus years.
>
>
>The bad part about this is Canada would be come the riches country in the
>world, and then the canadians would really think they are superior to Americans;
> ) ...hee hee hee (tung in cheek!)
>
>The state of Montana also has something similar to the oil sands.
>
>They try to tell us that the world was running out of oil to scare the people,
>it's bull shit! They where saying that the world was running out of oil
>back in 1972,1973, and 1975. We never ran out of gas, and its 35 years
later.
> When I was a kid, gas was $0.26 a gallon. It's not that we are running
>out, it's not supply and demand, it's that a select group has the power
to
>turn the spigot on and off to create shortages. We really need to find
a
>way, making Saudi Arabia rich is not the way.
>
>I know people that own oil wells, the government wont let them pump them.
> I think they want a reserve for war.
>
>I hope somebody figures how to fix the problem soon.
>
>Did anybody see this? Somebody engineered a micro organism that eats trash
>and then turns in to alcohol that can be used as a fuel. I've never heard
>a word about this since.
>
>Sorry, I'm jumping around. It's bed time!
>
>James
>
>
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersonhydrogen.com> wrote:
>>
>>Someone sent me that video, so I passed it on to a couple of
>>physics professor friends.
>>
>>Here's what they said:
>>
>>----------------
>>The problem with any of these systems is that the energy needed
>>for electrolysis is greater than what is provided by burning the
>>hydrogen so you need a free energy source such as wind or solar to
>>provide energy to electrolyze the water.
>>
>>I didn't look at video though since there is about one of these every
>>week produced on the web.
>>----------------
>>
>>
>>I think it is a hustle to draw in investors myself, which would explain
>>why there is so little actual data in the movie.
>>
>>BTW, BMW already has a hydrogen car in Germany. Works great.
>>Runs on hydrogen, not water carried about and converted to
>>hydrogen. It loses a lot of power compared to gasoline, so they
>>use turbos and this and that, and it runs pretty well.
>>
>>The biggest issue with hydrogen, besides storing it and a supply
>>infrastructure, is that the very best way to make it is a fusion
>>reactor...
>>
>>I REALLY want to see something to break us free of oil and the
>>politics involved with oil, but this video and the guys behind it, ain't
>>
>>it.
>>
>>I am afraid that it will take a pretty big disaster to get the change
>>started away from oil...
>>
>>DC
>>
>>
>>
>>"Bill Lorentzen" <bill@lorentzen.ws> wrote:
>>>http://www.thetadata.com/common/WaterFuel.wmv
>>>
>>>watch this vid.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>Dedric,
GM is swimming in red ink. They may actually go under. If there
was such an engine, they would have it out in a heartbeat, and if
they didn't Toyota and Honda would. No one can keep these guys
from innovating, which is why GM is in such trouble now.
DC
Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote:
>I completely agree. I remember when I was a kid (in the 70's - dating
>myself) reading about a 60mpg gas automobile engine developed by a guy in
>the 60's, but bought up by an oil company or major auto manufacturer...
>still haven't seen one.
>
>I'm sure board room conversations revolve around euphemisms such as
>"deliberate progress", "cost effectiveness", "feasibility studies",
>"manufacturing viability", or "legacy support". Okay the last one was when
>Bill Gates was taking a tour of Ford's headquarters...
>
>Regards,
>Dedric
>
>On 6/12/06 5:04 AM, in article 448d4a42$1@linux, "John" <no@no.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't buy the "this is why it's taking so long". They jus
|
|
|
|
| Re: Waves Trans-X WOW!! [message #68167 is a reply to message #68162] |
Sat, 13 May 2006 14:35 |
Deej [1]
Messages: 2149
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
ect?
6. Grate on the Parmesano Regiano. Use a Microplane right onto the pie. You
can do this step later in the process if you want, right beneath the mozz. I
like a good bit of parm, but not so much as to obscure the red of the sauce,
you know.
7. Fresh basil. Lay the leaves out evenly. Don't try to cover the whole pie.
Leave spaces between. This ain't Pizza Hut.
8. If you want a topping, keep it simple. Pepperoni or Italian sausage, one
or the other. I like to slice the raw sausage thinly and lay them out
evenly, once again with some small spaces between. You don't need a topping,
but that sausage will make you happy, I promise.
9. I like to cover the whole pie in cooked mozz, but that means slicing the
mozz thinly and laying the pieces out with space between. It melts and
spread out.
10. I just lay the thin baking sheet on top of the stone. Works a charm. The
traditional thing is to get the pie off the peel onto the stone, but it's a
trick with a twist to it, for sure. Since I dress the pie almost to the
edge, it's even harder for me. And I don't have a peel. I discovered my "lay
it on top" trick in frustration at being unable to get a pie off the baking
sheet one afternoon, and like I said it works a charm.
11. Let the thing cook until it is GBD, baby. Goldbrownanddelicious. Bubbly.
Browner than not. This is key. You're better getting it a little too dark
than too light, fer sher. 12 to 15 minutes.
12. Let it COOL some. It tastes better closer to room temperature than to
cooking temperature. Most food does. Give it at least five minutes. You'll
be busy getting the next pie in the oven anyway. Roll another crust out (a
tedious process, one that takes longer than you'll think, but then all of a
sudden it works) while the first one cooks and it'll be ready to throw on
the baking sheet once you pull the cooked pizza off it. Then quickly
assemble the next pie while the first one cools.
It's all about the best ingredients in the right proportions. The only
tricks are the dough, the sauce, and the PROPORTIONS. That's the key, not
too much of any one thing, and not too little.
Taste your sauce with a spoon and alter it until it tastes right to you. No
two batches of canned tomatoes are the same. When dressing the pie, think
Naples, not Papa John's. You don't have to make it minimalist, but we're
talking pizza here, not obesity in a box. You should see all the layers when
you look down at the pizza from above before you cook it. It's a thin
contraption, not some mountain of ingredients. It's a magical thing, how
those few ingredients belnd together in the oven to create a thing so
sublime.
I don't know, it doesn't sound so amazing when I read it back, but man, I
have never put anything tastier in my mouth. If anyone wants something
clarified, let me know. I tend shy away from offering advice, just by
inclination, but I'd love to help if someone needs it.
Jimmy
"chuck duffy" <c@c.com> wrote in message news:448cb8d0$1@linux...
>
> This is mostly for Jimmy... :-)
>
> Jimmy, when I read that you got it after ten tries I almost pissed myself.
> I have been working at it for the past ten years and have yet to produce
> a pie that I'm satisfied with. But anyway..
>
> Here is my ramble.. You gotta have a stone, or you gotta have some clay
> tiles. The stone needs to be heated in a 500 degree oven for at least 30
> minutes before hand. The dough needs to be at room temperature (go figure
> :-).
>
> Now here's where I go different from everyone else I know. I never,
never,
> ever put the pizza together and throw it in the oven.
>
> First I sprinkle the stone with corn meal - it will smoke like crazy, and
> after tossing the dough lay it out on the stone. Brush the top litely
with
> olive oil and push the assembly back into the oven.
>
> Watch carefully, and when the top of the dough starts to turn the
slightest
> brown it's time for the sauce. This is the crucial time, it's where
everyone
> makes the mistakes... Poke the bubbles that are forming and do the sauce.
> It doesn't take much sauce, a couple tablespoons full of crushed
tomato/garlic/olive
> oil, or a nice pesto. Too much sauce destroys the pie.
>
> Put it back into the oven until the sauce is hot and just starting to dry.
> There's nothing worse than a pie with sloppy, dripping sauce.
>
> Now it's time for cheese. Use interesting mixtures of fresh mozz, parm,
> romano, assagio, whatever you have on hand, but the key is this.... The
cheeses
> have to COOK, brown and almost burn to bring out the real flavor.
>
> Once you get to the point where you can reliably produce a great pie you
> can move on to adding toppings.
>
> The other thing people often overlook is that a grill is an excellent
pizza
> oven, but you need to watch the pie like crazy. Soaked apple wood is a
good
> wood to try on top of the coals.
>
> The other aspect that is often overlooked is the crust. A mixture of
crushed
> red pepper, kosher salt, parmesean and olive oil brushed over the crust
about
> 2/3 the way through is NUTS!
>
> I love pizza !
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I'm going from my sketchy memory here, but doesn't the process also require
some pricey metal for the electrolysis? Palladium or something, making the
price of the converter extra scary? Also, the water has to be distilled, if
I'm not mistaken. Another cost to add in.
Tony
"DC" <dc@spammersonhydrogen.com> wrote in message news:448ce50a$1@linux...
>
> Someone s
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 14 04:34:40 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.18736 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
