Upcoming books fully-subscribed with readers. Check progress here, too
-
silverquill
- Posts: 15991
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
- Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA
Post
by silverquill » January 13th, 2021, 11:14 am
Great!
This will be enough to keep Kevin busy.
I appreciate your contributions.
~ Larry
-
silverquill
- Posts: 15991
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
- Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA
Post
by silverquill » January 13th, 2021, 9:56 pm
Thanks, Wayne!
Marked Ready for PL
No high fructose corn syrup allowed.

~ Larry
-
GeraldAMoe
- Posts: 59
- Joined: November 25th, 2020, 12:02 pm
- Location: Tucker GA
-
Contact:
Post
by GeraldAMoe » January 14th, 2021, 4:52 pm
Reading is fun, duh. Mental!
-
KevinS
- Posts: 10196
- Joined: April 7th, 2019, 8:32 am
-
Contact:
Post
by KevinS » January 14th, 2021, 5:11 pm
Sec. 5, 8 -13, and 15 PL OK!
-
silverquill
- Posts: 15991
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
- Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA
Post
by silverquill » January 15th, 2021, 9:33 am
Thank you!
In the MW Ready for PL
~ Larry
-
silverquill
- Posts: 15991
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
- Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA
Post
by silverquill » January 15th, 2021, 9:37 am
Since we had volume issues with your recordings on another project, I thought I should double check all of these here.
Section ten, at 85.5 dB is below our 86-91 dB range and needs amplification.
The others or just within the lower range, so while you're at it it, it might be good to check them and bump them up a bit closer to 89 dB. as I outlined in the other project.
Thanks for your contributions here.

~ Larry
-
KevinS
- Posts: 10196
- Joined: April 7th, 2019, 8:32 am
-
Contact:
Post
by KevinS » January 15th, 2021, 9:41 am
silverquill wrote: ↑January 15th, 2021, 9:37 am
Since we had volume issues with your recordings on another project, I thought I should double check all of these here.
Section ten, at 85.5 dB is below our 86-91 dB range and needs amplification.
The others or just within the lower range, so while you're at it it, it might be good to check them and bump them up a bit closer to 89 dB. as I outlined in the other project.
Thanks for your contributions here.
I appreciate the guidance here, Pastor. I noted the lower volumes but didn't feel I could suggest a correction. As for Section 10, I thought .5dB wasn't enough to quibble about. I agree with your suggestions here. I shoot for 89dB, too.
-
Tsinaymel
- Posts: 55
- Joined: November 27th, 2020, 5:29 am
Post
by Tsinaymel » January 16th, 2021, 3:19 pm
silverquill wrote: ↑January 15th, 2021, 9:37 am
Since we had volume issues with your recordings on another project, I thought I should double check all of these here.
Section ten, at 85.5 dB is below our 86-91 dB range and needs amplification.
The others or just within the lower range, so while you're at it it, it might be good to check them and bump them up a bit closer to 89 dB. as I outlined in the other project.
Thanks for your contributions here.
No worries. Easily fixed with MP3Gain. Files reuploaded. Thanks!!
-
silverquill
- Posts: 15991
- Joined: May 25th, 2013, 9:11 pm
- Location: Pittsfield, New Hampshire USA
Post
by silverquill » January 16th, 2021, 9:52 pm
Volume checks out, so PL OK!
Thanks.
~ Larry
-
KevinS
- Posts: 10196
- Joined: April 7th, 2019, 8:32 am
-
Contact:
Post
by KevinS » January 18th, 2021, 8:31 pm