Round Earth Points 1.0

Posted by: Mike Sae on 17 January 2002

In homage to the J.Petrik's FEP scale, may I present the Round Earth Points scale:

Sources:

Is SACD your main source? Add 100 points

Do you use an off board DAC? Add 20 points

Is a tuner your *main* source? Deduct 30 points.

Is a turntable your *only* source? Subtract 30 points for missing out on all that exciting new technology.

Does it weigh more than 15 kilos? Add 5 points

50 kilos? Add 20

Are you unable to convert pounds to kilos? Add 15 points.

Is your turntable made in the UK? If yes subtract 20 points

Electronics:

Does your amp cost more than your source? Add 25 points

Does your amp generate >150 watts @ 8 ohm? Add 10 points

Add 30 for each tubed component, 40 of it’s a CDP.

Does your tube amp generate <10 watts? If yes, add 20

Does your preamp have a phase switch? If yes, add 30

Are any of your RCA jacks gold plated? Add 10 points

Add 10 for each fascia in brushed aluminium, champagne or chrome. Add an additional 10 for each casing in said finishes

Deduct 25 for each component in black.

Speakers:

Do your speakers cost more than your source? If yes, add 50. If no, subtract 50.

Are your speakers ported? If yes, add 15 points.

Are your speakers floorstanding? If yes, add 10 points for wanting bass. If no, deduct 10 points.

Are your speakers >93 db? If yes, add 25 points

What are the speaker cones made of? Add 35 for Kevlar, 15 for polypropylene, carbon fibre, or aluminum. Deduct 20 for paper or Bextrene.

Do you use a subwoofer? If yes, add 20 points. Add 50 points for each additional subwoofer.

Add 5 points for each 5 degrees of speaker toe-in
If speakers are poiting straight out, deduct 20 points.


Accessories:

Is your remote hewn from a solid billet of aluminum? If yes, add 10 points

Do your speaker cables cost more than your source? If yes, add 100 points
Do they employ network boxes? If yes, add an additional 50 points

Do your interconnects cost more than your source? If yes, add 100
Do they employ networks? Add an additional 50
Are they RCAs? Add an additional 100

Deduct 100 for using the stock interconnects.

Do you use a PLC? If yes, add 100 points

Add 15 points for each squidgy footer

Add 5 points for each cone.

Add 35 for each air bladder/ colostomy bag.

Add 25 if your rack contains marble

Subtract 20 points if your rack employs glass shelves.

If you recognized satirical quality of the previous question, deduct 30 points instead.

Add 10 points for each album you own by the following artists: Patricia Barber, Holly Cole, Keb Mo, Mike Oldfield, post-Police Sting, Diana Krall, The Eagles.

Subtract 15 points for each album you own by the following artists: XTC, King Crimson, Ken Boothe, Leftfield, Photek, Aphex Twin, Phish, Gang of Four.

[This message was edited by Mike Sae on FRIDAY 18 January 2002 at 18:01.]

[This message was edited by Mike Sae on FRIDAY 18 January 2002 at 22:09.]

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Mike Hanson
quote:
P3/DV10x4 Report

The deck is fine. It plays music, although it doesn't hold a candle to the CDS2. I listen to a few records each week, compared to dozens of CDs. The TT presents a nice cohesive sound, but surface noise is a bitch and changing records is a PITA! I'll stay with CDs as my main source (even if the turntable sounded better).

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Craig B
The original 'Take Five' is not tinkley. Not even in the slightest. Yours has to be at least an '80s re-issue. Many of them were awful but easy to sell to REP'ers in the US for major coinage.

Hey, do I get extra flat points for selling shite recordings to Yank round earthers?

Craig
still can't find that bloody abacus

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Paul Ranson
I have to confess, I also own 'Time Out'.

I wonder if one could scan an LP and then, rather than OCR, Optical Groove Recognize it? Save a lot of effort on laser focusing....

For some reason I'm doing pretty badly on REPs, perhaps because I only own one XTC LP, albeit that's a very original 'White Music' direct from the pressing plant.

"You can checkout, but you can never leave"

Paul

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Todd A
And just what is wrong with Sting?
Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Bob Edwards
I get minus 640. Waiting on a decision to include mono 78's at -25 each--I'll be in minus 9000 range.

Cheers,

Bob

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Mike in CO
...but only if they're the mono ones.

;-)

M

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Mike Sae
Like JP's origianl FEP scale, it's all for fun (ha ha ha). I ameliorated the glass question, though...

quote:
The original 'Take Five' is not tinkley. Not even in the slightest. Yours has to be at least an '80s re-issue.

By tinkly I was referring to the impression I get of his piano technique, not the recording quality; it sounds like he's j@rking off his piano, IMHO.

The music portion was culled from comments read here, plus my personal sensibilites. I like Mike Hanson's coinage: REP heroes or anti-heroes. Where would Pink Floyd fall in all this? They seem to care too much about sound quality to be considered FEP heroes, imho (their Division Bell concert was the best I've ever heard BC Place stadium sound) wink

BTW, I own a single 78, Ink Spots, "If I Didn't Care". Unfortunatly, my grandfather's 78 ampliphone doesn't work anymore- cracked tonearm, metal grinding sounds, etc.

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Mike Sae
quote:
Why give -ve points for paper cones? Aren't doped polypropelene the ones that Flat Earthers use?


AFAIK Naim, Rega, Neat, Royd all use doped paper. I thought older Linns did too, but was wrong. Epos and Spendor use Poly, what about Shahinian?

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Willy
-350 FEP's, assuming a Black Fraim counts as a single component.


Willy.

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Willy
quote:
Originally posted by Willy:
-350 FEP's, assuming a Black Fraim counts as a single component.


Willy.


Did mean REP's Honest. Stupid browser logged me out and I had to re-type. Asking a bit much to get it right twice.

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Guido
minus 320

luckily I kicked the b+w's out last week - so no floorstander minus - gold plated rca's: chord cobra has gold plated rca's and my tuner needs it... phew.

But minus 320 for a (nesrly) newbie!

Guido

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Steve Toy
That QS Ref. thingy of mine was available in a variety of wood finishes, and silver or black MDF, with silver or black rods.

If you ordered MDF shelves in black, they give you silver rods, and vice versa.

I specified black with black. razz

It's always a nice day for it wink Have a good one! smile
Steve.
It's good to get back to normal. wink

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Dr. Exotica
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Edwards:
I get minus 640. Waiting on a decision to include mono 78's at -25 each--I'll be in minus 9000 range.

Equally strangely, Mike in CO also alludes to a surprising number of 78s. What is it about Colorado (presuming of course the "CO" in "Mike in CO" is Colorado) and 78s? Is this some strange Ayn Rand thing?

I have a fair number of 78s, and I too lived in Colorado a few years back ... eek

Erik

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Ron The Mon
I lost 15 points on that question about metric conversions! Why would I want to weigh my turntable let alone know its weight in Canada?

I think the Brubeck deduction should stay. I've never, EVER, been to a round-earther's house who didn't have some Brubeck. And remember it's balanced by Gang of Four(for which I only deducted 5 points for each 7-inch 45) and Crimson. When I last played "Pictures of a City"(off In The Wake of Poseidon) for my round-earth buddies, they looked at each other, cringed, and got out of the room!

Ron The Mon
(who has a big-assed 78 player that probably weighs several thousand kilos as-well-as an 8-track player)

Posted on: 18 January 2002 by Bob Edwards
Erik--

Nothing too strange--my grandfather was a piano professor in NYC and collected thousands of records. Since he started collecting in the 1920's his collection naturally had hundreds of 78s,which I have now inherited, along with the balance of his collection. I have probably 4-500 78's in Colorado with roughly an equal number at my parent's house in NJ.

They represent a significant link to him for me; he used to take me to all sorts of musical events in NYC--all classical or jazz.

Cheers,

Bob

Posted on: 19 January 2002 by richard goldsmith
To Mike Sae: I don't know much about those pressings, but yours looks like the Canuck version of a "two-eye" press. Notably it says "CBS" and not "Columbia" but the 360 sound thingy looks distinctly mid to late 60's to me. I of course would stand corrected by a greater authority on these things than I (not hard ).

Bagging Brubeck for being round earth misses the point. If RE aliens like him, then that ain't Dave's fault. And to put him in the same camp as Krall !!!! C'mon guys!!!

Brubeck is one of the most misunderstood, maligned jazz artists IMO. No, I'm not his biggest fan (but I do own about 5 LP's) and yes, he is heavy handed on the keys, but he DID introduce jazz to a whole lot of white middle class fans who probably wouldn't have heard it otherwise. And as for Paul Desmond (who penned Take 5), what an Alto genius !!!

And Dave did write "The Duke". Full marks for that alone. Listen to his version on the '58 Newport album if you need convincing! (And it sounds great on an LP12!!!)

Posted on: 19 January 2002 by Derek Wright
I am very surprised that there are any Flat earthers being able to read or use this forum as is requires the use of a Graphical user interface based browser - I would have thought you would all be much happier on a usenet newsgroup where you can really go wild with the text based emiticons. Capital letters are so meaningful

<g>

Derek

s*d the shape of the earth as long as it sounds great

Posted on: 19 January 2002 by Lo Fi Si
By coincidence (or synchronicity... no, I don't own any of Stings opus) the local SH vinyl emporium had "Time Out" and "Time Further Out" in today but these were offset by KC and Aphex Twin purcahses.
I'm not sure I've got Brubeck tho. Very clever, but IMO missing the emotional connection.. maybe a few more glasses of Laphroig will help.

Simon

BTW the Time Out is TFL 5085 (not STFL)so I assume its mono... must be some FEPs there.

Posted on: 19 January 2002 by Dr. Exotica
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Sae:
P.S. does anyone know what vintage this is?

According to my Goldmine Standard Catalog of American Records (1998), this particular variant of Time Out (CS 8192, red label, "360 Sound" in white) is from 1966. Its value is as follows (at least in 1998):


  • very good - $3.75
  • very good+ - $7.50
  • near mint - $15.00

The most valuable version of CS 8192 (a.k.a., two to the thirteenth) has six "eye" logos, and the cover of the LP does not say "Featuring Take Five".

Erik

Posted on: 20 January 2002 by richard goldsmith
Dr Exotica:

The Goldmine reference is to US pressings of "2-eye" Columbias. The one pictured is not like any US press I've seen. In fact it's got "3 eyes" and is CBS rather than Columbia. I own quite a few US 2 eye and 6 eye presses of Miles, and Monk, and a couple of Brubeck and others. And that one pictured ain't like any US pressing that I've ever seen. My money's still on it being Canadian contemporary of the 360 in white "2-eye". So your dating would still be right on that basis if I'm correct.

(Can some Columbia pressing anorak from Canada help us out here?).

I would also urge some caution and suggest the Goldmine is limited to an approximation of the value of US pressings only, and of less relevance to the Canadian. There are lots of UK, NZ, Australian, Canadia and other Columbia/CBS pressings [and others] that Goldmine doesn't even address.

BTW, the Canadian 6 eye pressings look very different from the US ones too.

[This message was edited by richard goldsmith on SUNDAY 20 January 2002 at 09:30.]

Posted on: 20 January 2002 by sceptic
"Leftfield, Photek, Aphex Twin, Phish, Gang of Four."
What sort of music is this?
Posted on: 20 January 2002 by Dr. Exotica
Richard writes:

quote:
The Goldmine reference is to US pressings of "2-eye" Columbias. The one pictured is not like any US press I've seen. In fact it's got "3 eyes" and is CBS rather than Columbia. I own quite a few US 2 eye and 6 eye presses of Miles, and Monk, and a couple of Brubeck and others. And that one pictured ain't like any US pressing that I've ever seen. My money's still on it being Canadian contemporary of the 360 in white "2-eye". So your dating would still be right on that basis if I'm correct.

Your points are quite valid - my Goldmine only differentiated upon the color of "360 Sound" and whether or not there were six eye logos (no mention is made of whether there should be two or three eye logos otherwise). The CBS versus Columbia issue is also valid; I'll place my money with you on this being a non-US pressing.

quote:

I would also urge some caution and suggest the Goldmine is limited to an approximation of the value of US pressings only, and of less relevance to the Canadian. There are lots of UK, NZ, Australian, Canadia and other Columbia/CBS pressings [and others] that Goldmine doesn't even address.

Absolutely correct Richard. Goldmine only attempts to value the US pressings and market.

Erik

Posted on: 20 January 2002 by Mike Sae
It's strange- there's no indication of where's it's made. Usually, If something's made in Canada, they'll boldly declare "Made in Canada"
The jacket seems older ie. the cardboard is more board than card.

If it's late 60's, my Dad may have gotten it in Thailand or Singapore- which would make it an Australian pressing.

At any rate, if it is indeed worth 15 bucks, it may be the most expensive "old record" in my collection (seeing as new LPs cost >25 bucks).

cheers

mike

Posted on: 20 January 2002 by richard goldsmith
That is *definitely* not an Australian pressing you have there. The Aussie ones of that era were orange label CBS, similar to the UK label.
Posted on: 20 January 2002 by David Robert Bell
minus 115 gotta have some toe in

David big grin