[Jenn[_3_]]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Aug 29, 11:56*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*Clyde Slick wrote:





On 29 Aug, 17:56, ScottW wrote:
On Aug 29, 2:46*pm, Jenn wrote:

In article
,

*ScottW wrote:
On Aug 29, 2:04*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article

,

*vlad wrote:
On Aug 29, 1:41 pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
.
net
In article ,
Andrew Barss wrote:

In rec.audio.tech Arny Krueger
wrote:

Pretty easy to simulate, if you are handy with an
equalizer.

How to increase "warmth":

snip

Has anyone ever manufactured a device to do this
automatically, i.e. a "vivyl warmth"-ifier? * Given
that some people (claim to) really enjoy the sound of
vinyl, this would seem to have a built-in market.

Why do you say, "claim to"?

Simple, because an individual's preference for vinyl
might have nothing to do with actual sound quality.

True with CDs too, of course.

Of course, but why would one feel compelled to make *such
an
off-topic
comment?

Just being clear.

There does seem to be a general preference for sound with
less
audible
noise
and distortion, which is one reason why CD's outsell LPs by
more than
100:
1.

Fewer and fewer know what acoustic music typically sounds
like.

* What an elitist statement to make.

Not at all.

Yeah, it was a bit snooty.

No, it's not, but I understand your need to try to be critical.

*Critical? *I thought you liked to be snooty?

If stats show that fewer teenagers drink grape soda than they did 10
years ago, is it "snooty" to say that fewer teenagers now know what
grape soda tastes like?

*If you obviously think grape soda is some sign of culture and
culinary appreciation,
yeah, and it's also wrong.
I drink far less soda than I once did, but I still know what they
taste like.
Your conclusion is not a given from the facts presented.
Ask your community college students for some assistance with
your critical thinking.

ScottW-

LOL!!!

today's teeneagers were not teenagers 10 years ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bingo. *Please explain it to Scott.

Doesn't change anything.

Means can shift dramatically while the zero exposure
count remains outside the distribution and unaffected by
mean change. Your premise is the count outside
the normal distribution is changing while the evidence for
your claim is based upon the average.
That is foolish.

ScottW

Scott, the example was statistics showing that fewer teenagers drink
grape soda, not that the same number of teenagers who drank grape soda
years ago now drink less of it. See the difference?