I’m on a tear, reorganizing my office and the space that I suppose should be called the media room. Going through many long-buried things, I was reminded that I used to make DVDs.
Remember when the music and movie industries were so concerned about recordable media? They were convinced that people burning their own CDs and DVDs would destroy their businesses forever. Now, they couldn’t care less about physical media.
It’s here! Something you never expected to see, but is interesting to know about. The Peanuts limited edition, 75th anniversary turntable with Ortofon cartridge, built-in phono pre-amp and Bluetooth support.
“Audiophiles don’t use their equipment to listen to music. Audiophiles use music to listen to their equipment.” — attributed to Alan Parsons
That video contains a reminder of how ubiquitous cigarettes used to be. Cigarettes are the worst socially acceptable mass consumable ever devised, and I despise them.
I have read many varying opinions of original Thorens turntable belts vs. Thakker belts. Using an RPM phone app, I made my own comparison.
The Thorens belt in my TD-166 MKII has been installed for about six months. It spins 0.49% fast above 33.33 rpm.
The new Thakker runs 0.73% slow, while the graph appears to show less flutter than the Thorens belt. Running slightly fast is generally considered to be preferable to slow on a belt drive turntable. The reason why would take too long to explain.
My direct drive Technics table doesn’t have a quartz-locked motor to guarantee speed accuracy. It spins just a tiny bit slow, with noticeably less flutter than either of the belt measurements.
Turntable belts always stretch with use. I’ll leave the Thakker installed in the Thorens table and check the speed periodically.
Those graphs are reminding me to make one of my occasional Kardia heart checks. No flutter here!
Hmm. There’s a layoff at Automattic, the WordPress company.
How about a review of the Social Security Administration’s processes? Let’s assemble a team of experienced managers and technologists from within the administration, especially if they have concerns about how the administration operates.
Knowledgeable outsiders, including business experts and past SSA personnel, will also be recruited. Input from many beneficiaries will be solicited. After a careful review, new procedures will be recommended and a implementation plan developed for upgrading the technology.
Nah, let’s not do that. Let’s assume there is rampant waste to be found, and we’ll toss a bunch of nervy, inexperienced kids in there, with no knowledge of the existing systems or underlying technology. They’ll tear everything apart, let the chips fall where they may, and everybody will have to hope for the best, especially those who receive Social Security benefits.
