Two years ago, the world-renowned Glyndebourne opera house in Sussex, England, decided to form its own CD label to release material derived from its huge archive of live recordings made during more than forty five years of intensive systematic activity.  The first two of these, namely a recording made in 1962 of Mozart’s The Marriage of Figaro, sung in Italian, and a recording made in 2006 of Prokofiev’s Betrothal in a Monastery, sung in Russian, have just been released to euphoric press acclaim: “A Pandora’s box of operatic treasures.” Classic FM magazine, July 2008.

These initial releases were edited and mastered externally but in March 2008 the decision was taken to build up an internal house mastering capability and as a result a dedicated mastering studio has been constructed within the opera house environment.  John Barnes, who has managed the archival recording activity at Glyndebourne since the early 1960s, has brought in Sébastien Chonion, Tonmeister from France, to run the original recording and remastering activities and decisions have had to be taken about the software platform to be used. 

After a great deal of discussion and external consultation within the industry the decision was taken to install Magix Sequoia Version 10 for both new original recording and remastering, primarily because of its superior multitrack editing capabilities and the wide range of plug-in modules available for data-handling. Sequoia has now been in use on a daily basis since early April 2008 and the decision to install Sequoia has already proved itself to have been absolutely correct for this particular environment. 

Picture and Information Material:

Packshot Sequoia:

http://content.magix.net/press/UK/pressreleases/2008/misc/glyndebourne/pack_seq.zip

Glyndebourne’s The Marriage of Figaro:

http://content.magix.net/press/UK/pressreleases/2008/misc/glyndebourne/GFO_case_figaro.jpg

Glyndebourne’s Betrothal in a Monastery:

http://content.magix.net/press/UK/pressreleases/2008/misc/glyndebourne/GFO_case_betrothal.jpg

About Sequoia:

Sequoia is a High Definition Digital Audio Software package for the PC, specializing in the areas of ‘multitrack recording & editing’ and ‘broadcast & mastering’ areas. Sequoia offers all that a digital audio workstation needs: recording, editing (including 4-Point Source/Destination editing), mixing, mastering and Red Book standard CD burning. The burn process is carried out directly from the multi-track project together with all the effects, plug-ins, crossfades, and cuts without bouncing or time/memory loss, or the need for any intermediate steps.

For years, Sequoia has been an integral part of leading broadcast and mastering studios worldwide, including German public broadcasters, the Vienna Symphonic Library and Sterling Sound in New York.

How can such launching speeds are attained with the referenced system. Something along the lines of a steam piston pumped up in pressure until a specially designed part breaks and the aircraft is flung into the air. There are two aspects left out that seem pertinent to me (as both an engineer and retired Navy engineer):

1. the launching valve is a very fast opening-closing valve.

2. Prior to the launching valve, steam is “stored” in a steam accumulator, essentially a large insulated tank.

The combination of the accumulator and launching valve is what delivers a large amount of high temperature and high pressure steam to the pistons in a very short time. There is definitely a quick acting launch valve, length of time the valve is open is calculated based on take off velocity and weight of the aircraft. The “holdback device” is the part that breaks. The aircraft carrier carries a literal truckload of the holdback devices for the duration of the voyage, since it’s a one-time use device.

For ground-based operations, the aircraft can be held against the brakes until the engine is developing full thrust. To do that on a carrier, you’d need to find some way of coordinating brake release with steam valve opening – and it’s probably easier just to have a weak link in the system instead.

I don’t believe water is used as a hydrauli fluid in the arresting gear machinery. It is a Water-Brake, but this is part of the catapult, not the arresting gear. On the catapult, the pistons that are pushed forward by the steam need to decellerate from ~160 mph to zero in a matter of feet. This is accomplished by using a “water brake”, and the water does get very hot, and must be refilled periodically.

Don’t take fresh water too casually. A lot of land based arresting gear is water-filled – I’d be surprised if the shipborne stuff was significantly different. According to the LSO manual, the launching valves have adjustable orifices control the pressure of the steam into the pistons. The holdback device is also called a tension bar and when that breaks, the built-up steam then expands to push the piston and aircraft forward. Note that the manual discusses the importance of pre-heating the entire assembly to ensure that the steam’s energy is not wasted in heating up mechanical components. The carrier manual NAEC-MISC-06900 is also a good authority, but it only mentions “fluid” in the context of the arresting gear. Ditto the LSO manual; “engine fluid” but never “water.”

Very little of the steam escapes the catapult- the vast majority of it is reclaimed and reheated. It’s far easier to turn 211 degree water into steam than to boil seawater from scratch!

The structure supporting the catapult is incredible, as is the water brake- ships are designed as a giant cantilever beam with most of the displacement in the center, and the bow and stern as cantelievers. And I tell you what- the entire bow of the ship shakes when the catapult slams into the water brake! All that massive steel and it still moves under the stresses, it’s incredible.

Pre-heating has other purposes as well. Like most metallic systems, catapults expand when heated. They will expand significantly (I don’t recall the numbers) from ambient to operating. If one were to try to operate the catapult without the system being heated and expanded, I suspect there will be significant mechanical problems, including even the possibility of the ram hanging up. “Very little steam” escapes, this is relative. I believe as the equivalent of over a hundred gallons of water is lost on each cat shot, assuming steam leaks are minimal.

From my experience, its not just the bow of the ship sthat “shakes” on launch, you can feel it everywhere on the ship! You can’t really feel the bow cats outside of the bow, or the waist cats much outside of the sponson. I mean, there’s a little bit of noise but not really any noticeable vibration and there’s so much noise from elsewhere it’s drowned out. If you’re down 2nd deck and below aft of about frame 100 or so, you’d never even know they were launching or recovering aircraft.

I think they use a lot of steam, but I can guarantee they’re not loosing a hundred gallons of water during launch, there just isn’t that much steam coming through the slit, a couple of gallons, maybe ten gallons at the most. If you were losing that much steam over the length of the catapult, it would lose pressure and stop accelerating towards the end; instead we just see a tiny bit of seepage. Perhaps, it’s a difference in carriers.

“Travel is more than the seeing of sights; it is a change that goes on, deep and permanent, in the ideas of living.” – Miriam Beard

Do you believe that it’s expensive to travel? Have you ever excitedly looked over a glossy brochure of your dream vacation, only to discover that it will cost you thousands and thousands of dollars for a single 10 day vacation?

If this has happened to you, I can understand. I too would dream about traveling the world, but get disenhearted when I saw those expensive price tags placed on travel.

But I have learned that travel is NOT expensive. You see, travel agencies want you to believe that it costs a LOT of money to travel. That way they can jack-up the prices of tours to earn a bigger commission for themselves. They want you to think that you must have money, a lot of money, to be able to travel.

This kind of thinking does not help the majority of us. It distances us from our dreams.

A fact that most people don’t realize, is that world travel can be down-right cheap. It can actually be cheaper, a lot cheaper, than staying at home.

It amuses me that travel agencies try to SELL travel. They try to get you to pay for things that you can do all by yourself. They try to keep this a secret, but -

You Don’t Need Them.

What do people do when they travel anyway? They get a place to sleep, eat, use transportation systems and spend money on entertainment and a few miscellaneous things like laundry, clothes and souvenirs.

What do you do at home? You pay the rent, buy your food (and sometimes go out to eat), you drive or use the bus, and you spend money on entertainment and a few miscellaneous things like cable and utilities.

Travel costs are really the same damn thing as staying at home; the big difference is that you’ll be seeing and doing a lot of different things.

Let me ask you this: If I were to offer you a place to stay in your home-town, meals, entertainment for you of my choosing, and have a strictly scheduled shuttle-bus that takes you where I want you to go and when, and I’ll only charge you $10,000 a month for the BASIC package, would you accept it?

Not only would you not accept it, but you’d

LAUGH IN MY FACE!

So why do travelers consistently do this very-same thing? Why do they pay travel agencies a ton of money for the very things they can do all by themselves, for a lot cheaper, and for a lot more freedom and flexibility?

World travel is not expensive at all if you know how to do it. It is easily possible to travel the world for only $1,000 a month or less; that’s only about $33 a day.

How much do you spend on a normal day at home?

Here is an example of a single-person’s average monthly expenses in the United States (this is a modest estimate):

Rent: $800 a month

Food: $300

Transportation (gas, insurance): $400

Utilities (phone, internet, electricity, water, cable): $300

Entertainment: $300

Misc. (clothes, gifts, doctor bills): $400

Total: $2,500

Now let’s sum-up the average monthly costs of world travel (when you know how to do it):

Hotels: $300

Food: $150

Transportation: $300

Utilities: $0.00

Entertainment/Site-Seeing: $200

Misc. (internet cafes, souvenirs, clothes): $50

Total: $1,000

Let’s break this down by day:

Hotel: $10

Food: $5

Transportation: $10

Entertainment/Site-Seeing: $6.67

Misc.: $1.67

Daily total: $33.34 USD

World travel costs less than staying at home, and offers a lot more freedom.

I’m sure you’re thinking that I am grossly under-estimating travel costs. But actually, the expenses above can be a LOT cheaper.

Did you know that in some countries you can book a three- star hotel for $10? Or that you can get comfortable accommodation for as low as $0.50 to $6.00 per night? Are you aware of the tens of thousands of people across the globe that invite travelers to stay at their homes – for free?

How about food? Full-blown buffets are offered for $0.50. Lunches with soup, the main course, a soda and dessert can be had for $1.50. Some companies will even pay you to dine at their restaurants!

Transportation? How about taxis that go anywhere in the city for $2. Inter-country buses for $20 to $50. Or international flights at 80% off?

By balancing your travels with expensive countries and cheap countries, your average travel costs can be just $1,000 a month or less.

Remember, people actually live in the countries that are foreign to you. In some countries the average monthly wage is only $150 – but it is enough to live on.

If they’re not paying thousands and thousands of dollars a month to be where they are, then why should you?

In many places, with just $1,000 a month to spend, far from living like a pauper, you’ll be living like a king.