From tonysounds@yahoo.com Sun Nov 11 20:48:00 2007
Subject:Re: Fwd: Decimator web page up with sounds

Well, there are a couple inaccuracies here. As for singing on American Idol, as a studio guy, you should know FULL WELL that singing out of tune is not subjective, and in fact, can be measured and quantified.

And as for leslie rotors, I would need a true Hammond/Leslie fanatic/insider to verify this, but I don't think there was a calibrated RPM to the leslies when they left the factory or showroom; in fact, I believe there was a "window of acceptability" (hmmm...subjective!). I brought the full Dominator to my gig last nite (with my original band, HelloDave), and when on break, I was watching the leslies and those two upper horns definitely turn at different speeds. Both are well within the window of acceptability (from my non-objective view!), and yet I wouldn't term one more "right" than the other. Same thing when I would bring out both my shorty leslies; both were "right" even though they were definitely at different speeds.

Unless someone can point to a spec sheet with those RPMs, I'm not sure we'll ever come to a conclusion to this thread, other than individual subjective opinions. (Which is fine, but not conclusive, nor a final word.)

Unfortunately, I did not get to those clips tonite as I was tied up all day. Tuesday with any luck. As for exactly duplicating my "In The Flesh" performance, I wouldn't even attempt it. On things like that, I don't exactly choreograph "fast here", I go with the flow, or the mood. But when I do the clip, I'll play the song.

T

T

goffmac747@aol.com wrote:

All you have to do is find a reading on Fallacious? Arguments. It will list the many types of fallacies wherein people unknowingly find themselves trapped. It helps to know these fallacies because then, the argument or the debate issue ends up being focused on, rather than the person(s). It also teaches us how to argue effectively so that we can avoid confusing the issues and make clearer statements in order to bring light to the issues, not the heated personality conflicts, or moreover, confusing the issues and/or the point. It helps us think clearer and allows us to monitor how debates are progressing and when they veer off track. Yes passion is here in this thread, no doubt, but it can be misdirected passion which ends up causing problems... like a missile without a tail piece.

Dave seems to like his mods on his decimator and i'm curious to hear them.

I played with two leslies once and had always imagined two top rotors going at the same time (with one bass rotor,) drifting in and out of phase as your observation of tail light signals coming to a point where they all blink in sync and then drift off onto their own timing, which I am familiar with myself.

Musicians are attracted to sounds and blinking lights. Many can hear a tone in a refrigerator? motor and some can't. We get bored in traffic and then the tail light in front of you becomes of interest as you try and see if it can keep time. But it can't because it's not a time piece with a spring relay clicking it off and on. I wonder though if with chips controlling tail? lights, are the signals more beat steady? I don't know. I haven't seen a car that has a metronome blink to its taii lights.

Based on what I heard from Dave's clips, it was the first, polymer belt I have heard and the first single motor system also. From that, to my ears, the decimator was a turn for the worse. But to be fair, it was because it was not properly demonstrated. Now if you can reference a dominator as with your tweakage on the B4/Muse receptor leslie sim you made, then I would have another view of what is possible of this new line of Speakeasy leslies and hence, a comparison that I may? find in the ballpark. Since I consider your leslie work on your clips on your Pink Freud site, to be something I can gravitate towards, something I would play myself, I hope to hear the dominator played as well,? since I can't be there to play it myself.

In the same token that you state that inferior or superior can only be evaluated "subjectively" and not "objectively" is the same thing that runs at the core of this thread. A subjective value placed on ramp up and ramp down time is what has made Don's popular leslies, a reference for all rotating speakers. Objectively would be a picture of the inner workings of any rotating speaker. Now, what it sounds like, is subjective and the real basis for discernment. It can also be seen as subjective that someone sings out of tune. Watch the try outs for American Idol and you'll see subjective at work. But it is the collective subjective view of Paula, Randy, and Simon that makes or breaks the step up to the magic 12 finalists. The same way there is a definite collective subjective view on what makes something a reference or an ideal.

Yes, Speakeasy changed the design, but does it work, is the issue. They are a company that has actively sought to improve the leslie for users and that is commendable in itself. But it's technology is only as good in so far as those who are willing to accept it and to be able to make a noticeable difference; that if it takes the "reference" and makes a real improvement, it? has then succeeded. Otherwise they would be following all those other rotating speakers, and the list is many, of rotating speaker designers that never came to the fore.

Cream always rises to the top.