[Jenn[_2_]]

....isn't singing in tune important anymore? Watching the NBA All Star
half time. Yuck.

[MiNe 109]

In article

,
Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? Watching the NBA All Star
half time. Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:

In article

,
Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? Watching the NBA All Star
half time. Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. At least it's human.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article

,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA All Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article

,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA All Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Feb 15, 10:12*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:





On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article

,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA All Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

I haven't heard that either. What is interesting, however, is the
number of Beatles songs where Paul played drums instead of Ringo.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Boon wrote:

On Feb 15, 10:12*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:





On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article

rg
,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA All
Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

I haven't heard that either. What is interesting, however, is the
number of Beatles songs where Paul played drums instead of Ringo.

Yes, especially early on. There was a lot more switching around than
many people realize; George on bass, John on lead, etc.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Feb 16, 10:27*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*Boon wrote:
On Feb 15, 10:12*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article

rg
,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA All
Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

I haven't heard that either. What is interesting, however, is the
number of Beatles songs where Paul played drums instead of Ringo.

Yes, especially early on. *There was a lot more switching around than
many people realize; George on bass, John on lead, etc.

The Geoff Emerick book is especially illuminating about these issues.
I've only read bits and pieces of it, but I'm tempted to buy a copy of
it today.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
Boon wrote:

On Feb 16, 10:27*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*Boon wrote:
On Feb 15, 10:12*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article
-septemb
er.o
rg
,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA
All
Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

I haven't heard that either. What is interesting, however, is the
number of Beatles songs where Paul played drums instead of Ringo.

Yes, especially early on. *There was a lot more switching around than
many people realize; George on bass, John on lead, etc.

The Geoff Emerick book is especially illuminating about these issues.
I've only read bits and pieces of it, but I'm tempted to buy a copy of
it today.

It's an excellent book, IMO.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Feb 16, 12:48*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,





*Boon wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:27*am, Jenn wrote:
In article
,

*Boon wrote:
On Feb 15, 10:12*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:

On Feb 14, 10:58*pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article
-septemb
er.o
rg
,
*Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? *Watching the NBA
All
Star
half time. *Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. *At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Not according to any of the printed sources.

I haven't heard that either. What is interesting, however, is the
number of Beatles songs where Paul played drums instead of Ringo.

Yes, especially early on. *There was a lot more switching around than
many people realize; George on bass, John on lead, etc.

The Geoff Emerick book is especially illuminating about these issues.
I've only read bits and pieces of it, but I'm tempted to buy a copy of
it today.

It's an excellent book, IMO.

I was visiting a friend and he had a copy on his coffee table. I spent
a couple of hours leafing through it and told myself that I had to get
a copy for myself.

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote in message
...
On Feb 14, 10:58 pm, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:

In article

,
Jenn wrote:

...isn't singing in tune important anymore? Watching the NBA All Star
half time. Yuck.

Or you could go to modern country and hear it all auto-tuned.

Stephen

Yeah, I guess that I would take out of tune. At least it's human.

I heard a rumor once that Ringo's vocals were manipulated to be in
tune on Beatles albums. I wonder if that was true.

Pitch change without tempo change was a much later,
digital process. He was not the world's greatest singer
but he always made a fair job of the vocals he was
given, "Act Naturally" was pretty good:-)

It was of course possible to bring a guitar tuned flat to the
right pitch by running the tape a little slower whe recording.

This same trick could be used as an double tracking
effect too, by recording the first guitar at the right speed,
and slowing the tape by 2% (about a quarter of a semitone)
for the second pass. At the right speed. the second guitar
sounded brighter, and the overall effect, with the two
panned l+r was like a massive twelve string:-)

Iain

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

...isn't singing in tune important anymore?


Depends on context.

No charge.



--


Jim Smith

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

...isn't singing in tune important anymore?


Depends on context.

It does?

[James Smith]

"Jenn" wrote :

...isn't singing in tune important anymore?


Depends on context.

It does?


Wow - Jann posts a message without namedropping some old hasbeen.

Well done!!

--


Jim Smith

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"James Smith" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote :

...isn't singing in tune important anymore?


Depends on context.

It does?


Wow - Jann posts a message without namedropping some old hasbeen.

Well done!!

Way to avoid the question.

[Glanbrok[_2_]]

On Mar 6, 3:19*pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

Does anybody else feel nostalgia for the time when Yoon-Yoon the Idiot
Pandaborg used to leap to Mr. ****'s defense? G

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 7, 12:45*pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 6, 3:19*pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.


Does anybody else feel nostalgia for the time when Yoon-Yoon the Idiot
Pandaborg used to leap to Mr. ****'s defense? G

I barely remember that guy.

[MiNe 109]

In article
,
Boon wrote:

On Mar 7, 12:45*pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 6, 3:19*pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Stephen

Does anybody else feel nostalgia for the time when Yoon-Yoon the Idiot
Pandaborg used to leap to Mr. ****'s defense? G

I barely remember that guy.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 7, 9:09*pm, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
,

*Boon wrote:
On Mar 7, 12:45 pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 6, 3:19 pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Yeah, but I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny. I
don't care enough to recall what it was, though.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 7, 11:29*pm, Boon wrote:
On Mar 7, 9:09*pm, MiNe 109 * wrote:





In article
,

*Boon wrote:
On Mar 7, 12:45 pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 6, 3:19 pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Yeah, but I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny. I
don't care enough to recall what it was, though.

Did James say something funny?

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 9, 12:02*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Mar 7, 11:29*pm, Boon wrote:





On Mar 7, 9:09*pm, MiNe 109 * wrote:

In article
,

*Boon wrote:
On Mar 7, 12:45 pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 6, 3:19 pm, Jenn wrote:

Way to avoid the question.

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Yeah, but I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny. I
don't care enough to recall what it was, though.

Did James say something funny?

Yeah, that was it!

[James Smith]

"Boon" wrote :

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it
was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Yeah, but I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny.

For your edification I will give you an example of what proof is, so that
you may understand what it is. Here follows a verbatim quote from you
posting under the pseudonym "calvin coolidge" (message id:
) which
proves that you are a liar.

Enjoy ;-)



Question posed to Marc :

Are you sure "James" was the Krooglebeast's sockpuppet?

Marc's response :

It was verified using software programs... Plus he admitted it in a private
email.

Marc contradicts himself :

I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny.



--


Jim Smith

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 17, 5:34*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Boon" wrote :

Some time ago, when the "James Smith" pseudonym first appeared, it
was
suggested that this persona is a sockpuppet animated by the Krooborg.

That was me. Since then I've changed my mind.

There were a couple of times when Arny was waiting to pounce on replies
to "Smith" posts.

Yeah, but I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny.

For your edification I will give you an example of what proof is, so that
you may understand what it is. Here follows a verbatim quote from you
posting under the pseudonym "calvin coolidge" (message id:
) which
proves that you are a liar.

Enjoy ;-)

Question posed to Marc :

Are you sure "James" was the Krooglebeast's sockpuppet?

Marc's response :

It was verified using software programs... Plus he admitted it in a private
email.

Marc contradicts himself :

I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny.

That's not a contradiction. Duh.

[James Smith]

"Boon" wrote :

That's not a contradiction. Duh.

A contradiction is precisely what it is. Double Duh!

Again :

Marc said :
"It was [proven] verified [that Jim Smith is Arny]."

Marc said :
"I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny."


You are a liar, but not a very good one.


--


Jim Smith

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 18, 5:49*am, "James Smith" wrote:
"Boon" wrote :

That's not a contradiction. Duh.

A contradiction is precisely what it is. Double Duh!

No, a contradiction is precisely what you're doing right now. You're
just being contrary without backing it up.


Again :

Marc said :
"It was [proven] verified [that Jim Smith is Arny]."

Marc said :
"I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny."

You are a liar, but not a very good one.

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind. Are you saying that
everyone who changes their mind is a liar?

Now you do sound like Arny. Idiot.

[Glanbrok[_2_]]

On Mar 18, 1:41*pm, Boon wrote:

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind. Are you saying that
everyone who changes their mind is a liar?
Now you do sound like Arny. Idiot.

James is probably very proud of his C+ in Kroologic 101.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 18, 2:03*pm, Glanbrok wrote:
On Mar 18, 1:41*pm, Boon wrote:

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind. Are you saying that
everyone who changes their mind is a liar?
Now you do sound like Arny. Idiot.

James is probably very proud of his C+ in Kroologic 101.

Well, it is Arny's MO to latch onto an off-the-cuff remark and ride it
for all it's worth.

[James Smith]

"Boon" wrote :

That's not a contradiction. Duh.

A contradiction is precisely what it is. Double Duh!

No

Yes





Again :

Marc said :
"It was [proven] verified [that Jim Smith is Arny]."

Marc said :
"I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny."

You are a liar, but not a very good one.

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind.

No, you're a filthy liar who pretended it was " proven " that I'm Arny.





--


Jim Smith

[James Smith]

"Boon" wrote :

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind. Are you saying that
everyone who changes their mind is a liar?
Now you do sound like Arny. Idiot.

James is probably very proud of his C+ in Kroologic 101.

Well, it is Arny's MO to latch onto an off-the-cuff remark and ride it
for all it's worth.

This guy is a bare faced liar !

He actually stalked me on another group to spread more lies.


--


Jim Smith

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 19, 2:19*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Boon" wrote *:



That's not a contradiction. Duh.

A contradiction is precisely what it is. Double Duh!

No

Yes



Again :

Marc said :
"It was [proven] verified [that Jim Smith is Arny]."

Marc said :
"I remember seeing something that proved it wasn't Arny."

You are a liar, but not a very good one.

It's not lying...it's changing one's mind.

No, you're a filthy liar who pretended it was " proven " that I'm Arny.

No, I'm not. Like your soulmate, you have trouble with understanding
the written word. You also label anything you don't like as a lie.
That's why you have to bracket your own interpretations of what I said
above with your own commentary. Your singular argument is simply no
good.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Mar 19, 2:22*pm, "James Smith" wrote:
"Boon" wrote *:



It's not lying...it's changing one's mind. Are you saying that
everyone who changes their mind is a liar?
Now you do sound like Arny. Idiot.

James is probably very proud of his C+ in Kroologic 101.

Well, it is Arny's MO to latch onto an off-the-cuff remark and ride it
for all it's worth.

This guy is a bare faced liar !

He actually stalked me on another group to spread more lies.

Arny did? Bad Arny!

If you'd just go back on your meds, maybe you wouldn't have these
identities crises.