From: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org (support-system-digest) To: support-system-digest@smoe.org Subject: support-system-digest V2 #39 Reply-To: support-system@smoe.org Sender: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-support-system-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk support-system-digest Monday, February 8 1999 Volume 02 : Number 039 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: support-system-digest V2 #38 ["Nicole W." ] Richmond setlist [Michael Connolly ] The Dolby questions ["Mark Schmidt" ] Correction [kiskos@webtv.net (Edward Kisko)] Bounced message [Jason Long ] Bounced message [Jason Long ] Bounced message [Jason Long ] Bounced message [Jason Long ] Bounced message [Jason Long ] Liz at the lounge ax ["keelyfish" ] Dolby noise reduction [Jason Long ] Jen (or anyone) - How to record from a CD (or three) ["sea. o;brien" ] Re: support-system-digest V2 #38 [SpArkAnGuL@aol.com] Re:Girlysound Whipsmart lyrics [mhuisman ] liz on reader's poll ["Jenny Sayler" ] CHAPEL HILL REVIEW ["robert joyner" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 01:31:13 -0500 (EST) From: "Nicole W." Subject: Re: support-system-digest V2 #38 djkim said: "I like how she alternated playing guitar and playing with herself." Can't you get arrested for that? I mean, a concert IS a public place. And other celebrities have been apprehended for this: George Michael, Pee Wee Herman. Now Liz? Who would have thought? uhhh - -Nicole ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 01:39:28 -0500 (EST) From: "Nicole W." Subject: What happens when you post quickly without reading the whole digest Okay. I just read the digest, and I was reading my post. I saw that I signed one: "Nicole 'I want all that [not all that] stupid old shit like letters and sodas'" which makes no sense upon rereading it. What I meant by [not all that] was that that stuff isn't all that stupid. I could have gotten teh same effect by writing "I want all that [un-] stupid old shit like letters and sodas". but I chose my words badly. Well since it's only been like 10 min since i got my digest, adn that leaves almost 24 hours til the next one, hopefully I won't feel inclined to post again, since i've done so twice already! at this rate, imagine how many posts you'd get from me in one day! About... 12x24 which is... 144x2 which is... 288! 288 posts, kids! Ouch!! Well... no since I haven't sent thsi, and it's really been about 15 min since the digest came, let's say umm... 8x24 which would still be... 192. Which is still alot. So I'll try to not do that to you all. Later, Nicole ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 05:55:31 EST From: HiroUCLA@aol.com Subject: Question Hi everyone! Though I'm on this list, I rarely check the messages that are posted. So I was wondering if anyone has a tape from the most recent LA show in 9/98 @ the Mayan theatre. Please respond to my email (hiroucla@aol.com). I'd appreciate it very very much. Jason. ps- finally saw "polyester bride" on 120 minutes. yay!!! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:50:01 +0000 From: Ascending to the Stars Subject: Re: support-system-digest V2 #38 > "Just got a one-sheet thru from EMI. The album is out 1st March over here > on special-price initially and she will be here for the week of release > to do some promo (I'm trying to find out what/where exactly) and is > supposed to follow that up with a full tour in April. Will post any more > info as I get it, likewise if anyone else know owt. Cheers." gee, well, i'm starting to get the impression my running around europe may have to be somewhat broken up if i want to catch liz.. :-p now i have a dilemma... why cant' life ever be simple! oh, to those who get to see S-K and versus, you lucky dogs! i'm jealous! now i should get to see S-K in april-may-- the tour update from carrie at matador says they should be europe-bound then, but i would love to see versus. i was going to go see them over the summer, but they were playing in boston the weekend my parent's were visiting me, so i couldnt' go. and then i was going to go the sunday night of the same weekend in providence, but i had to drive back from vermont earlier sunday and was too tired to drive more. :-p anyways.... to whoever asked where i check my mail here at UCL (peter, i think... you were taking LSATs?) i dont' do it in the basement of the language building. i did for the first week, until i discovered the lab in the psych building, where i take all my classes, and since it is kind of removed from the rest of campus, its much easier for me to just stay here. and the lines tend not to be quite as long, depending on where you go. to whoever said it sounds like i couldnt' be spending a lot of time in class between all my concerts... see, that is great thing about the british higher education system (at least at UCL)-- i only have like 8 or 9 hours of class a week! that is so little. and since my grades dont' transfer, i dont' actually have to do any work aint' life grand like that? moving on... heather nova was fabulous on friday! i got a set list (yay!!) and i taped the show... i think it came out pretty damn well, although its hard to tell cause i have nothing with decent speakers here. have i mentioned that i miss my stereo?! whereas on monday i was at heather's feet, friday i was at the lead guitarist B.A.'s feet. she totally rocks! go girl lead guitarists! anyways, heather did 2 encores, which means i probably didn't see the whole show monday night, cause we had to leave after the first encore to catch the last train back to london. so friday night, heather comes back out for the 2nd encore, does an acoustic song with nadia (her cellist) and then the band comes back on, and i start screaming for "i'm alive" cause that is one of my fav songs off "siren", and i think one of the only songs i really wanted to hear that she didn't play yet (she closed the main set both nights with amazing renditions of sugar). and B.A looks down at me, smiles and gives me a thumbs up, and i was so happy!!! then i bugged the damn roadie until he gave me the set list. he should have been nicer-- while they were setting up the stage, we pointed out to him that this little light with tape over it was burning (ie there was nasty smelling smoke) i was going to try and find heather after, but i couldnt figure out where the hell she was going to come out! oh well, it was still fabulous. i'm debating going to reading tomorrow night for another show i have to call british rail and find out how to get there.... and if there are tickets hmm... i think i will go to an art museum this afternoon. that's all.. sorry no liz content.. oh, i listened to secretly timid all weekend. beg me is such a great song... i love the image of "get down on your knees and beg me" in that context.. hehehe... or maybe its just my general disgust with men as of late... i feel your pain nicole... well, enough from me, after that monster-post on friday. have a nice week everyone! tootles! (:ruthie:) "i'm alive... i survived you... but i still have visions of you" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 05:55:46 PST From: "Chipko Arnold" Subject: and the runner up is... >From: "Nicole W." >Subject: One more thing... sorry > >Chipko... I want to hear what you have to say about Gillian >Anderson! please? (that's me, asking nicely) It went something like this....... has anyone seen gillian anderson in the flesh, STUNNING!!! shorter than you'd think, but drop dead amazing. Real star quality, much like Michael Stipe has, she shines. Very hard to breathe when you're near her. She's still only the second most beautiful woman from Grand Rapids though. That kind of thing. Slow week for gigs in London, so Ruthie should be able to post more and maybe get some work done! Only joking. The only gig of note is on Wednesday at the Water Rats. It's arco/tram/white hotel. Well worth a fiver. See you there? "and i wonder how i've come to know so much less than i knew before" ... Joseph Lee Henry. "i know the promise is so much better than the real thing" ... Grand Drive. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 07:31:06 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Connolly Subject: Richmond setlist Chopsticks wcse 6'1" Mesmerizing Polyester Bride Flower - said beforehand "Can I sing a dirty song?" Fuck And Run Supernova Perfect World Johnny Feelgood Divorce Song Again, about forty minutes. Crowd really accepted her too, which I thought was strange. Never saw an opening act treated with such approval before. The show was GREAT!!! left center of stage, sixth row. And my editor was sitting first row center. He had a photo pass for the shoot. Will try to get a couple of shots scanned and sent to those with websites, okay? Give me a couple of days for the review. Give me a couple of days == Mikey C Va Beach An unfamous, but not that kind, of guy. "I found Jesus. He was behind the couch the whole time." - - Will Harris _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 08:10:34 PST From: "Mark Schmidt" Subject: The Dolby questions Let's see if I can help out. Here's how Dolby noise reduction works: WHAT TAPE NOISE IS: It's just part of the limitations of cassette tapes. Take a brand new blank tape and listen to it through headphones. That hiss you hear is tape noise. When RECORDING with Dolby turned ON, selected frequency ranges are recorded at an increased volume. These ranges are the ranges where the natural noise level of the tape medium is highest. It's roughly like pushing one or two sliders on your graphic equalizer up a couple notches from normal (say, from 0 to +3). The part of the music that's going to lay on top of that tape noise is recorded louder. When PLAYING BACK with Dolby turned ON, those same frequency ranges are de-emphasized. This brings the level of the MUSIC in those ranges back down to normal, while the noise is muted to a lower-than-natural level. Roughly equivalent to pushing those same equalizer sliders back down as far as you had pushed them up (for our previous example, they would be at -3). So, on playback, here's what you get: Recorded WITHOUT Dolby, played back WITHOUT: Sounds like the original, except with inherent tape noise, which can pile up each generation of re-recording. Recorded WITHOUT Dolby, played back WITH: You would be muting some frequencies; would not sound like the original. Recorded WITH Dolby, played back WITHOUT: You would have some frequencies emphasized; would not sound like the original. Does not increase the noise level, though. Recorded WITH Dolby, played back WITH: Sounds like the original, but with less tape noise than if Dolby hadn't been used. THE CATCH: Dolby isn't perfect. When you cut out that noise, you tend to lose SOME music with it. Many people prefer to just go without, and try to keep the generation of the tape as low as possible to keep the noise down. BTW, Dolby C is a refinement of Dolby B--same idea, just different frequency ranges, more narrow to necessitate less cutting of the music. HOW THIS MATTERS TO THE TAPE TREE: The most important thing is that whoever makes the tape and whoever is getting the tape are using the same noise reduction, or both using none. Beyond that, it's a matter of personal preference whether you prefer tape noise or the side-effects of Dolby. What needs to be avoided is the case where generation 1 (gen1) is recorded with Dolby B f'rinstance, then played back without to make gen2, which is played back with Dolby C to make gen3, etc. etc. Mixing up the modes in successive generations results in crappy sound quality very quickly. WHAT YOU SHOULD CHOOSE: If you don't know what you want, the safe thing is to ask for NO noise reduction. That's the mode with maximum equipment compatibility, and the simplest sound quality issues. That's my opinion; use your own discretion. - ---Mark ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:00:03 -0500 (EST) From: kiskos@webtv.net (Edward Kisko) Subject: Correction Sorry for the interruption. When I said Jase was telling me some time ago that Liz's guitar was tuned down one-and-a-half steps on "Dogs of L.A.," I meant "Shane." This is probably not a big deal but I just wanted to clarify. Steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:23:06 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Bounced message From: "nicoapril@cybergal.com" Subject: Am I all wrong about it? Hi,guys. Today I got a private mail from a girl named Diane from somewhare on the net-board about my posting to it. I mentioned that Female artists are rocking and sounding so positive these days and as a example for it I pointed Liz, PJ,Cortney Love,and Juliana. (I tell you I am not a femisist at all.) And here is what Diane said to me; >How can you compare Pj an Liz to sell out shit like miss Love At least Pj >and Liz write about what they like. They do not care about sales and not care >about us. Cortney absolutely does. Look at her on MTV and the songs she writes >what the kids want to hear. To read it above, I got somewhat hurt. I do not think that Hole are selling any piece of shit at all. And now I am not a kid any more but I can say I love Hole sound still. This is not because Cortney writes what I want to listen to, but it's because they just sound so beautiful to me,and that's why I wanna keep listening to their albums. Also Liz, I believe, somehow care about us and sales. PJ or any Pro-artists too. If they never do, why would they release their products all over the world? Am I so wrong about it? Happy-Rock! nicoapril :) NP." Why do I lie?" Lucious Lackson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:23:35 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Bounced message From: kiskos@webtv.net (Edward Kisko) Subject: WARNING: guitar stuff, LOTS of it First of all - Bryan, I see that you know a lot about guitar playing (more than I originally surmised), so I'm taking you very seriously, and I hope that for the benefit of myself & the other curious guitar players on the list, you can help figure some songs out in the future. However, there are two things you need to do before you take your study of Liz's guitar playing any further. 1) You need to understand that Liz does not use *irregular* tuning (this goes for you, Dark Side of the Moon, too) on many songs at all. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to come up with *one* song on which I thought Liz ventured out of "standard" tuning. (we'll get to my definition of "standard" in a moment). To come up with the most interesting songs while working within the confines of one kind of tuning (standard) seems to be a lot harder than tuning the guitar every which way to meet one's desires - that's why I think Liz's playing is so cool. [Note: when I say standard, that doesn't mean that Liz doesn't ever tune *down* or *up* -- for instance, on a song like the album version of "Stratford-on-Guy" Liz's guitar is in standard tuning E A D G B E, but on "Mesmerizing" - again, the album version, not live or anything like that - each string is tuned up 3 notes, so that when she plays the first chord, E, at the first fret, it sounds like G. If you're not aware of this, it can create serious problems for you when you try to figure out these songs just by listening to the album.] 2) You need to see a video bootleg. If you're the kind of person who can look at a person playing guitar in concert on a videotape where the picture is slightly blurry and *still* figure out where each of the performer's fingers are on the fretboard, then I have a videotape for you. It's Liz's April 1995 solo electric show in New York City. I've learned to play several Liz songs *exactly* (and I mean *exactly*) the way she plays them ("Explain it to Me" included) by watching this tape. However, there are trickier songs (especially "Strange Loop" and many more) that are too quick or too blurry or simply look *too* complicated for me to figure them out. Oh, and Liz's guitar strings, it should be noted, were tuned up 2 notes each, so when she played the E chord on the first fret, it was actually F#. (I should point out that I am an untrained guitar player, I've never had a lesson in my life, and everything I know I learned from watching performers or reading this 100-page guitar manual I have or stuff on-line. So if my guitar terminology sounds really retarded, that's why. I don't even know if I'm describing Liz's tuning down/up of her guitar properly. A while ago, Jase told me that the "Dogs of L.A." guitar was tuned down one-and-a-half steps - or, as I would put it, 3 notes - so that the 6th string E was actually Db, if I'm remembering that correctly. Anyway, I should also point out that Liz tunes her guitar up/down to fit her vocal range most comfortably, and for nothing else.) I'll use an example, "Mesmerizing," to illustrate my point. You must keep in mind that her guitar on this song on Guyville was tuned up like so: G C F Bb D G. Now, for my sake (I don't understand tabs very well), let's just pretend that it's tuned regularly E A D G B E, the first chord Liz plays is E (actually G). The second chord is C/G or whatever you call it, then D/A. It looks like this: first chord: open 2 2 1 open open second chord: 3 3 2 open x x* *these 'x' notes are open, and of course, you don't play them, but Liz *does* in many spots during the song, hit those notes, creating a non-diatonic chord sound -- she does this in *many* of her songs (the vast majority, in fact). This was one thing you missed in your post, Bryan. Sure her weird chords aren't really made up because every chord has a name and blah blah blah (you know what you wrote), and I fully agree and understand, but are non-diatonic chords given names? As I said, I don't understand or know much about guitar notation/terminology, but Liz uses (makes up) *so* many non-diatonic (funky, fucked-up, clashing of the notes) chords that... well, it's hard to name them or explain when to use them, as is the case with "Mesmerizing." Forgive me if I sound really stupid when describing this -- I've been thinking about this for a damned long time, but I have never actually had to explain it using real words... ;) Anyway, back to "Mesmerizing": third chord: 5 5 4 open x x fourth chord: (standard A-shape barre at 5th fret) 5 5 7 7 7 5 fifth chord: (standard E-shape barre at 3rd fret) 3 5 5 4 3 3 sixth chord: (I *think* this one is correct) 7 9 9 8 x x seventh chord: 10 10 9 x x x And then play this progression again *twice*, BUT at the end of it on the second repeat (on the CD, it's at 0:19), instead of the fifth chord being an E-shape barre at the 3rd fret, it's an E-shape barre at the FIRST fret (in normal tuning, this would of course be an 'F' major chord), and the sixth chord, which basically brings the intro to an end (at 0:21 - 0:24 on the CD) is the funkiest chord in the song: 2 2 1 open open (or x) x This chord is supposed to sound like a really fucked-up B chord (of course, tuned up one-and-a-half steps, it actually sounds like a D). If one were to disregard the up-tuning on the guitar, the entire intro progression, minus the hammer-on/off stuff from 0:23 - 0:30, would look like this: E C D D G B G E C D D G B G E C D D F B ...and if you know anything about what makes a chord progression funky or pretty, you can tell that this is definitely a funky chord progression, even *without* the fucked-up chord fingerings (and they *are* fucked-up). Then of course this intro ends on a hammering-on/off (whatever you call it) of the 5th and 4th strings of the first chord in the series, with a pause at 0:26 and 0:30 (on the CD) to play an A chord (forget what it's called) thusly: open open 2 2 open x (or open, whatever) ...and then the vocals finally start. I won't go any further because my post will bounce, but if anyone wants to continue at a later date, that'd be fine with me. Basically I've got the song figured out (from watching Liz play it on my videotape) except for the "all of the time..." part, as I said previously (which, by the way, takes place all in the 1st and 2nd frets, Bryan, I promise - I have it on videotape!). My apologies to anyone offended by the sight of my retarded pseudo-tab. It's taking up a lot of space in this digest, I know. But there's more! Read on... To the girl (forget your name, apologies) who wanted to know which songs of Liz's are harder - guitar or piano - I will say, without a doubt her guitar stuff is harder. Liz took piano lessons as I kid (I was forced into it myself) but then took up guitar, and she's stayed with it ever since, not really playing piano seriously. "Chopsticks" can be played by any idiot with a sense of rhythm and "Canary" isn't much harder, but "Animal Girl" is one I haven't attempted. It's the hardest of the 3, but it's still not that hard, I'm sure. Another thing: the guitar tabs on the 'net for Liz songs are positively awful, loaded with errors, and written with absolute carelessness, almost like it doesn't really matter if it's 75% WRONG. Not too shabby is the tab for "Supernova," and the one "Polyester Bride" I've seen wasn't *too* far off, although it did actually leave out entire chords of Liz's, even when the author claimed it was 'exactly' how Liz plays it (and it's not). So don't think that tabs on the net are accurate. They're far from it. We'll get a lot further going back and forth like this than we will following incorrect tabs by people who don't care or even know anything about Liz's guitar techniques. New solo Liz show in Chicago *right* at the end of my Spring Break in Cocoa Beach (lock your door, spaceeggy Katie; I just may be in the neighborhood). Can I possibly make it? So very, very sorry for the extra-long post. These things happen sometimes. Steve ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:24:33 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Bounced message From: Sellwood Subject: Poly Bride on Rage Ok so I know that this is totally irrelevant to nearly everybody, but I had to ask. Brian and Stuart both mentioned the fact that the "Polyester Bride" clip was finally shown on Australian Tv on friday night. Stupid me, I missed it. I was wondering whether either a) somebody in NSW taped it or b) anyone knows whether Rage shows new release videos two weeks in a row. I have this sick feeling that they don't. Any advice/help whatever would be great. Emma. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:28:34 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Bounced message From: aquarius74@webtv.net (Stephanie Morris) Does anyone know why Liz isn't joining Alanis on the west coast leg of the tour? I have only recently become a Liz fan and missed her here in CA in May. That's all. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:29:29 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Bounced message From: "April Haitsuka" Subject: Re: support-system-digest V2 #37 >Ms. Phair was s-e-x-y. I like how she alternated playing guitar and >playing with herself. She thinks Michael Jordan played high school >basketball at Chapel-Hill...or she was baiting us. I know MJ played college hoops for UNC-Chapel Hill, but I think he went to high school in Wilmington, NC. April (formerly exiled in North Carolina) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:38:52 -0600 From: "keelyfish" Subject: Liz at the lounge ax Far as I know, the Ax is one of those line up at the door clubs. They tell you in advance if there are shows that can be pre-ticketed (like shellac was one a little while back) Liz is still off in the horizon, so currently the word is no buy ahead of time tickets, but that might change, so keep an eye on their website. Also, for folks who don't know, they're 21+. That's not just depending on the show, that's an all the time gig. The only way in if you're a kid is to bring your mom (it works! i've done it! she ended up liking june of 44!) or bring a fake (it works! i've done it! : ) If anybody's going to go, email me and I'll meet you there or something : ) keely ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 13:38:36 -0500 From: Jason Long Subject: Dolby noise reduction Considering some of the questions I have received about Dolby noise reduction in regards to the tape tree, I thought that I would forward this message, which was originally posted to the Guyville list in '96, as it may be of some interest. I've deleted all the email addresses though, since I am forwarding it without permission. I'm surprised just how many old posts like this I still have saved. Jase I'm sharing this E-mail with the list, as I originally meant to do...Chris' response follows. :P -W. =================================================================== Ichabod Crane wrote: >I'm not sure what anyone else's G-sounds are like, but my last copy >(which some bastard at school stole from me), I got a little less >than 2 years ago from someone on the list. The main problems on my >copy were tape hiss and low recording volume. If this is what's >wrong with your copy, and you have two SEPARATE tape decks (this >won't work with just one dual well tape deck), you can dub another >copy of your tapes, and raise the recording level and use dolby >noise reduction, HX Pro filtering, and could play around with a >graphic equalizer as well. This may clean them up a little bit. Although this is well-intentioned, and certainly may help the sound/performance of an individual's personal copy of girlysounds, I would not recommend this for anyone attempting to dub girlysounds for another fan. One reason your girlysounds may sound so crappy is because some other fan used Dolby and/or filtering in a generation before yours! It's a given that tapes lose level (and gain noise) with each successive generation. One of the first things you learn in a pro recording class is that YOU CAN NEVER GET THAT LEVEL BACK. It's lost, magnetically, and replaced by noise. As the level decreases, the noise, and hiss, become a larger and larger part of the bandwidth. Each successive generation builds on the noise and hiss of the generation before. Dolby "noise reduction" is a process licensed by Dolby Laboratories to virtually any manufacturer that meets their minimum standards. There are several versions of the process available to consumers (A,B,C, and so forth). The Dolby process affects a recording by boosting the *high end* on the copy being made. If you are taping girlysounds, this means you are actually amplifying the high-end guitar and vocals (such as those on "Elvis Be True") into the stratosphere. Guess what else is in the high end? Yep, the hiss. The Dolby process arrogantly assumes that the listener will play the tape back with THE SAME DOLBY PROCESSOR with which the tape was created. The processor "interprets" the boosted high end and puts it back into its proper place, supposedly for better performance. Given the hundreds of manufacturers that have licensed the Dolby trademark by meeting (or exceeding) their standards, it is virtually impossible to *improve* a sound recording using Dolby technology. In fact, since you're boosting the hiss (the distinction should be made between "noise," which is the minimal amount of sound (quiet) on the tape itself, and "hiss" which is the recorded sound of the motor, takeup reel, etc.) you are actually increasing the generational loss by introducing more junk into the bandwidth. Using graphic equalizers, filtering, compression, etc. are just manual ways of achieving the same end -- you will add noise. ALWAYS LEAVE DOLBY OFF. The finished recording will sound hissier at lower volumes, but don't be fooled. The level will be at the highest you can enjoy at that generation. You can always Dolbyize a second copy for your own listening, but I bet you'll prefer the original. There are a few ways to maximize girlysounds for future generations: one is to use metal (type IV) tape, which holds more signal. If you have a 'metal' switch, it's probably best to leave it off!! It frequently means another unwanted noise reduction scheme which boosts hiss. If you use metal tape, clean your tapedeck regularly!! They sound markedly better than type II's, but leave more deposits and magnetize heads faster. The other legitimate method for improving girlysounds is by boosting the recording level (you're right, usually only accomplishable by those with two tape decks). The perfect solution would be for someone to identify an unadulterated, fairly low-generation copy with all the songs and record them to DAT or some other non-compressing digital format. The digital format ensures that successive copies will have exactly the same level as the playback of the original tape. If someone feels they have a superior copy (which would include "Money," "In Love With Yourself," "Dead Shark," "Miss Lucy" and "One Less Thing," which are absent from at least 75% of girlysound tapes), they only need dub the tapes once in order to get a digital master from which anyone can enjoy a low-generation recording. Come forward!!! ///////WB ==================================================================== From: Ichabod Crane Subject: Re: Don't Dolbyize Girlysounds!! >Although this is well-intentioned, and certainly may help the >sound/performance of an individual's personal copy of girlysounds, I >would not recommend this for anyone attempting to dub girlysounds for >another fan. I meant how one could clean up their own copy, as everyone and their brother pretty much has a copy. Personally I'd never let someone else put Dolby on a recording of mine, because if a deck is miscalibrated at all, it will make the recording very muddy. >One reason your girlysounds may sound so crappy is because some other >fan used Dolby and/or filtering in a generation before yours! Seeing as the the lowest generation copy of g-sounds currently floating around on the net are 10th generation or so, so lord only knows what's been done to them. >The Dolby process arrogantly assumes that the listener will play the >tape back with THE SAME DOLBY PROCESSOR with which the tape was >created. The processor "interprets" the boosted high end and puts it >back into its proper place, supposedly for better performance. Given >the hundreds of manufacturers that have licensed the Dolby trademark >by meeting (or exceeding) their standards, it is virtually impossible >to *improve* a sound recording using Dolby technology. My understanding is that as long as the recipient's deck has an adjustable azimuth control, that will compensate for the differences. >The perfect solution would be for someone to identify an unadulterated, >fairly low-generation copy with all the songs and record them to DAT >or some other non-compressing digital format. The digital format >ensures that successive copies will have exactly the same level as >the playback of the original tape. If someone feels they have a >superior copy (which would include "Money," "In Love With Yourself," >"Dead Shark," "Miss Lucy" and "One Less Thing," which are absent from >at least 75% of girlysound tapes), they only need dub the tapes once >in order to get a digital master from which anyone can enjoy a >low-generation recording. Come forward!!! Just so you know, if you were trying to send this to the list, I don't think it made it through, I think it just went to me. That would be a perfect solution, but I doubt it's all that viable. As far as I know, all of the copies on the internet are derived from Ross Jeffcoat's copy (which is at least 10th gen or so), so basically the only way that the better sounding copy will pop up is if someone has a copy from a totally different source... Chris ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 15:46:25 -0330 From: "sea. o;brien" Subject: Jen (or anyone) - How to record from a CD (or three) Use a tape deck that has v/u level meters and recording level controls. Set the recording level controls so that the very loudest points on the CD (or other input source) nudge the v/u meters just over the 0db mark. There is usually a red mark just above the 0db point on the meters. Stay out of the red zone. Stay out of the red zone. The thing to do now is to find the loudest point on the source CD. Switch the amplifier or receiver to CD mode. Now, to the tape deck: either find the Tape/Source switch on the tape deck and set it to Source (this lets the v/u meters monitor the CD), or Pause the tape deck in Record mode (same thing). Play the CD for a while (as long as it takes,)while watching the tape deck's v/u meters, and adjust and readjust the recording level controls so that the meters approach (but do not enter) the red zone during the loudest passages. When you are satisfied with the recording levels, then stop the CD, and stop the tape deck (and make sure it is fully rewound). Now you are almost ready to record. Set the Dolby switch to the position desired by the person whose tape you are making. Set the tape-type switch according to whether you are using a normal or chromium tape We should all be using chromium, "CrO2", also known as "Type II", tapes. (Some machines set the tape type automatically.) Examine the CD player to be certain it is set to normal playback mode. And you are ready to go. Start the tape deck rolling in Record mode. Wait eight or nine seconds while the leader advances past the tape heads, then press Play on the CD player. And don't forget to turn over the CD at the end of side-A ;-) You may find that you have to readjust the recording levels for each CD you are copying. Different CDs may have been made with different audio levels. Indeed, the steps above need to be applied every time you make a new tape. You will find that every source you record from will have different audio levels. The reason for all this? Because if you let the needles wander into the red zone while recording, then the music will be distorted at those points; and if the needles never ever approach the red zone, then the recording will lack dynamic range and will sound "hissy" since you'll have to play it back extra loud, which will unnecessarily amplify the background tape noise. And if none of that makes sense, then drop me a line or something :-) Th'ar ya go. - -Sean O seano@thezone.net ICQ7394709 "Daylight catches me by surprise Almost every night And kicks my way another hole to sleep I guess it started off slow But it's picking up speed And it's gaining on me Like a carnivore" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 99 15:20:11 -0500 From: Meredith Robbins Subject: Whoops-a-doodle Okay, I'm an idiot. My post in the last digest was meant to go to Jason, not all 900 of you. What can I say, it was that kind of day. Meredith is sheepish baa ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 15:11:33 EST From: SpArkAnGuL@aol.com Subject: Re: support-system-digest V2 #38 You know i JUST missed going to alanis and liz in chapel hill or somewhere. i was pretty pissed off just thought you might like to know and if anyone in nc went to it you hafta tell me all the details ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:05:21 -0500 From: mhuisman Subject: Re:Girlysound Whipsmart lyrics Hey again, to who asked about the background vocals in the whipsmart chorus, I believe its.........'ebon, ebon, ebonettes' I just got a copy of Shelved Demos and a Liz interview on 102.1 the edge in the mail (Thanx Heather:-) Marlie ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 15:52:22 -0600 From: "Jenny Sayler" Subject: liz on reader's poll For those who may be interested Liz is #13 in the Rolling Stones reader's poll for the march 4 issue ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jenny "Nobody puts Baby in the corner" - Patrick Swayze- from the movie Dirty Dancing http://www.liz-phair.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 15:18:13 PST From: "robert joyner" Subject: CHAPEL HILL REVIEW REVIEW OF THE ALANIS/LIZ PHAIR SHOW IN CHAPEL HILL FROM THE RALEIGH NEWS AND OBSERVER. JUDGING FROM THE REVIEW THIS GUY MUST BE A MEMBER OF THIS LIST. COURTESY OF ROBERT "FUCK OFF" JOYNER REVIEW: ALANIS MORISSETTE By DAVID MENCONI, Staff Writer,      CHAPEL HILL -- When pundits decry the perceived deterioration of American society, they usually cite Marilyn Manson, falling SAT scores, or the lack of outrage over President Clinton's alleged misdeeds. But they're overlooking the real scourge, which is the popularity of Alanis Morissette -- an "artiste" destined to someday be remembered as one of the great frauds of the 20th century.      Either you buy Morissette's act and find her every brain emission as fascinating as she does, or you don't. Saturday night, several thousand true believers showed up at Carmichael Auditorium to partake of her trip, and they just flat ate it up.      Truth is, though, her 90-minute set was genuinely awful -- samey-sounding hippie rock full of, like, really deep streams-of-banalities pumped up as if they actually meant something. "I'd be lying if I said I was completely unscathed, I might be proving you're right with my silence or my retaliation, would I be letting you win in my non-reaction?"      Wow.      Carmichael's horrid acoustics proved to be a blessing in disguise, rendering much of Morissette's bull droppings unintelligible. The sound was all booming drums and throbbing bass. Morissette herself was more of a visual than musical presence onstage. Mostly, the singer stalked back and forth yowling, bending down on the emphasis points and occasionally dancing a spastic jig. Occasionally, she strummed an inaudible acoustic guitar or wheezed away on harmonica. It was utterly charmless.      If wisdom is beyond Morissette, she's still quite adept at conveying rage, which accounted for the set's few highlights. Just about the time numbness set in, she rallied with "Right Through You," a score-settling litany of career frustrations from her 1995 debut, "Jagged Little Pill." That segued into "All I Really Want" (more psychobabble, but its psychedelic vamp arrangement transcended the hall's acoustics), and the obligatory audience singalong of her signature hit, "You Oughtta Know."      Unfortunately, the show immediately came crashing back to Earth with more sludgy, tuneless bromides. It cratered with the encore versions of "Thank U" ("How 'bout them transparent dangling carrots?") and "Ironic" (don't even get me started).      During the second encore, Morissette told the crowd, "This was one of our best shows on this tour." I'd hate to see one of the bad ones.      Where Morissette's band rendered rock-star cliches with deadly seriousness, opening act Liz Phair did them in a self-mocking way, spoofing her reputation for stage fright with lots of "heroic" poses and "dramatic" fake endings. Phair's 11-song set leaned heavily on her 1993 signpost album, "Exile in Guyville," with a half-dozen songs.      Even more songs (seven, by my count) had the F-word or worse. Phair dished out the potty mouth with total unself-consciousness, to the consternation of some parents in the audience.      While the three songs from Phair's current album, "Whitechocolatespaceegg," were better live than on record, they still didn't have the spark of the "Exile" songs. "Six Foot One" kicked like vintage Rolling Stones, while "[Expletive] and Run" was as funny, poignant, sad and disturbing as ever.      Too bad that, at 40 minutes, Phair's set was less than half as long as Morissette's. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of support-system-digest V2 #39 ***********************************