Listener 4069: Conversion by Samuel

[midazolam]

I very much enjoyed last years penny dropping moment with playtime, and likewise with this weeks listener, it was very neat how it all came together. No ambiguities although one answer I couldn't find in Chambers but is well known in this modern society.

Thanks Samuel

[silversolver]

I am a recent convert to the Listener and am now hopelessly addicted. I agree with the above comments that this puzzle was superbly constructed and very enjoyable. I am however struggling with the wordplay for 12ac (although am pretty sure I have the answer) and any subtle hints to put me out of my misery would be gratefully received!

[Quizmonster]

A one-letter abbreviation followed by a two-letter abbreviation.

[bobbycollins]

hey up, quizmonster

glad you're still with us

[Quizmonster]

Yo! Never been away, Bobby, though my forays into Q & P - whilst daily - are brief!

[milford15]

Just finished my second Listener after 18 months of trying on and off, and am definitely addicted now. I have given up many times in frustration in that period, and swore I would never even look another Listener. Some preambles put me off immediately in the past, but I really enjoyed this one and enjoyed the PDM a lot - great pride!

Many thanks to ruthrobin for some gentle nudges offline, and keeping me encouraged. Also, thanks to all for the hints and supportive messages here - they all helped too to keep me motivated!

[Clamzy]

QM -Like Bobby C I'm pleased you're still around, which brings to mind, what's happened to rapparree in the past year or so?

[mad max]

After failing on last two, pleased to have completed my first of the year, most enjoyable.

[silversolver]

Thanks, Quizmonster. A general question - I have an old (2003) Chambers and occasionally there appear to be answers that do not appear in that edition (including, I think, a couple in this week's puzzle). Do most Listener afficionados feel that it is worth updating to the new edition? How often does the approved edition used by setters change?

[Clamzy]

Silversolver : The Chambers Dictionary has a new edition every five years, the current one first appearing in 2008 although there was an interim one (unusually) between yours and this one. You may have heard that there has been at takeover of the company producing Chambers publications (I think they are currently Hodder), and therefore whether there will be a 2013 edition is in the lap of the gods.

[Ruthrobin]

Adding to what Clamzy said. When a new one appears, compilers seem to enjoy using the thousand or so new words (this time - 2008 - there were 300 completely new main entries, 'while other items have been added in the form of subentries or new meanings of existing words' - totalling over 1000). However, they soon settle down to the same old words. You will probably survive quite well on the 2003 version though, with the current insecurity about the future of Chambers, the 2008 one might be the main work of reference in use for quite a long time.

[cluelessJoe]

Quizmonster - Happy New Year, long time no hear ... so when did they let you out?

As for my two penn'orth on Chambers silversolver, I reckon that there's not enough material difference in 5 years to make it worth forking out for a new edition. Strikes me that the only significant (likely to recur) item I have seen mentioned to date is 'over' as another official definition for the 'O' abbreviation. Though maybe I'm just watching the pension a bit closely - I have 2 copies of 2003, and whilst one is desperately ragged, I am reluctant to upgrade whilst the second does not even have a crease in the dust jacket!

[Quizmonster]

A happy new year to you, too, Joe...and to Clamzy. I've wondered about Rapparee for some while as well, not solely because he seemed to share my views on certain things!
I think it may not be ME who needs to "get out", though! In the past week, I've posted 16 answers in Q & P, News, Arts, History and Phrases & Sayings. I suspect, therefore, that some of you guys are the ones who need to break out of the Listener-thread prison. There IS life elsewhere, though it may not be "as you know it"!
Cheers

[Apache4D]

Well I too enjoyed that thoroughly....took me about 17 cold-solves of the down clues before I gave up trying to work out that part of the introduction and switched to the across clues.......three cold solves later and I had guessed the whole introduction and suddenly my grid was healthily filled! Although I spotted the subject and conversion early on, I stupidly didn't spot the quotation despite it being pretty obvious what it was going to be......all in all fair clues, with a slow solver haha! Only a few hours to wait till 4070......Enjoy everyone!

[Archie1962]

I had given up on this one on Tuesday. Then Thursday on the train I had finished my sudokus so I had a quick look and it all started slotting into place. Very satisfying. I wonder how many other Listeners I have let slip like that?

[Mysterons]

This crossword gave up its thematic material a little too quickly for me, which did of course make solving the majority of the clues a lot easier. A nice puzzle though - I especially liked the reference to his stance on Vietnam at 43.

[Eril]

I spotted the misprint and have the answer to 13a, confirmed by the 'conversion' and otherwise checked. The wordplay, however, is a mystery. Conveyance gives the first half, but can 'I' be 'ai'?

[Scree]

Eril

I had the same doubt, but looked at the clue again and found a redundant word that I'd overlooked. There's a one-letter abbreviation that fits.

I finally put some hours in today and finished this - quite hard enough for me, and very satisfying as it unfolded. My only gripe concerns 41 across, though I may have missed a simpler explanation - the wordplay seems to point to a rather approximate equivalent of a phrase in the clue, with some letters removed. It seemed to stretch the rules a bit, if so, but it's a minor quibble.

[Eril]

thanks Scree - you are right, I had just discounted that word. 41a is also fair - the final word is an instruction telling you what to do to a word defined by 'more sexually attractive'

[Scree]

Agreed, but I'd see the word in question better defined as 'more attractive', while something like 'hotter' is a better fit for 'more sexually attractive'.

I said it was a minor quibble...