Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: World Service Audio Archive

Expand Messages
  • charles_rooke
    Mark - Don t think I m knocking (I m not), but FWIW the better quality WS intro is more heavily edited (and therefore shorter) than the lower quality
    Message 1 of 88 , Feb 1, 2013
      Mark - Don't think I'm knocking (I'm not), but FWIW the better quality WS intro is more heavily edited (and therefore shorter) than the lower quality (presumably UK original) intro we originally had. Thus my old patched version runs 29m14 whereas your v3 runs 28m50s. Users choice!

      Charlie

      PS - Anyone confused by this post please note there was a typo in Mark's original - we're actually discussing #397.



      --- In just-a-minute@yahoogroups.com, nylon wrote:
      >
      > Hi James. Just to confuse the issue, I've taken the slightly-better-quality
      > #387 WS version intro and grafted it onto your high-quality remainder to
      > produce another version (v3).
      > It's in my JAM jar at http://nylon.net/up.
      > JAM fanciers can take or leave it as they please...
      >
    • James R Curry
      I just compared Charlie s earlier merged version to my earlier merged version (29:03). The start of mine seems to play a little faster than Charlie s - I
      Message 88 of 88 , Feb 3, 2013
        I just compared Charlie's earlier merged version to my earlier merged version (29:03).  The start of mine seems to play a little faster than Charlie's - I don't think there's any content difference, just a tape speed issue.

        On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Josey Smith <josey.i.smith@...> wrote:


        Thanks!


        On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 7:34 PM, charles_rooke <charles_rooke@...> wrote:
         

        Josey - It's queued and should appear shortly at http://www.sendspace.com/folder/mwcec2

        Charlie

        --- In just-a-minute@yahoogroups.com, Josey Smith wrote:
        >
        > Charlie, would it be possible for you to upload your 29m14s version.
        >
        > The longest version I have is 29m03s, and although it's only 11s different,
        > I'd like to see what is different.
        >
        > Thank you,
        >
        > Josey
        >
        >
        > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:12 AM, charles_rooke wrote:
        >
        > > **
        > >
        > >
        > > Mark - Don't think I'm knocking (I'm not), but FWIW the better quality WS
        > > intro is more heavily edited (and therefore shorter) than the lower quality
        > > (presumably UK original) intro we originally had. Thus my old patched
        > > version runs 29m14 whereas your v3 runs 28m50s. Users choice!
        > >
        > > Charlie
        > >
        > > PS - Anyone confused by this post please note there was a typo in Mark's
        > > original - we're actually discussing #397.
        > >
        > > --- In just-a-minute@yahoogroups.com, nylon wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Hi James. Just to confuse the issue, I've taken the
        > > slightly-better-quality
        > > > #387 WS version intro and grafted it onto your high-quality remainder to
        > > > produce another version (v3).
        > > > It's in my JAM jar at http://nylon.net/up.
        > > > JAM fanciers can take or leave it as they please...
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >







        --
        James R Curry
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.