In a message dated 22/08/02, johncole4@........ writes:

> Rolando,When Frank said,that he had never seen such an outstanding job of
> editing of a posting , He was saying that he had never seen so much data
> removed from an event to make it look better. 

Hi John,

       It would be great to know what posting you were referring to.

       There are two good reasons for going to very low frequencies:
       You may want to cut out man made noise.
       If you have severe wind / weather noise, you may need to reduce the 
frequency      quite a bit further.
       Very long period responses are available. The Lamont-Doherty 
Cooperative Seismographic Network (LCSN) springs to mind.
       Do these considerations apply?

       Regards,

       Chris Chapman
In a message dated 22/08/02, johncole4@........ writes:



Roland
o,When Frank said,that he had never seen such an outstanding job of

editing of a posting , He was saying that he had never seen so much data

removed from an event to make it look better. 




Hi John,



       It would be great to know what posting you were referring to.



       There are two good reasons for going to very low frequencies:

       You may want to cut out man made noise.

       If you have severe wind / weather noise, you may need to reduce the frequency  &n
bsp;   quite a bit further.

       Very long period responses are available. The Lamont-Doherty Cooperative Seismographic
 Network (LCSN) springs to mind.

       Do these considerations apply?



       Regards,



       Chris Chapman