In article , Mike Gilmour
wrote:


Surely both the content and the authors background lends credence to the
validity of those posts. If I was consulting a doctor I would like to
be assured that he/she holds valid qualifications for his/her position
and has practiced successfully within his/her field for a suitable
period - (far too easy to bury your mistakes Mr Shipman)!!! I certainly
would not take the word of someone working not from a doctors surgery
who purports to be a doctor but shows neither the certified
documentary evidence or concrete proof of a solid working experience
within the field in question.

Well, even though I have some formal qualifications, I also have various
reasons to doubt that they are always a good guide to the ability of the
person who is 'qualified'.

On one level, I've certainly seen many graduates who leave with good first
degrees, but who I would not have employed in a lab. Some students are
rather better at passing exams than in showing any real understanding of
the 'facts' they have memorised.

And in the 'medical' area I'm afraid I could tell some real horror stories
of the really shocking treatment, etc, that some GPs, consultants, inflict
upon their patients. My experience is that it become necessary in some
cases to change GP/consultant and spend a lot of effort learning about an
area for yourself to try and tackle the ignorance and errors of some
qualified medical people. :-/

I'd like to hope my personal experiences were unusual. However from
meetings with others, and from reading about the topic this sadly seems not
to be so.

FWIW I'd say that Iain's best 'qualifications' are his relevant experience.
No idea if he has any formal qualifications, and TBH am not really
interested as they don't normally say much to me.

I have seen Iain's name on many IMO good recordings and I quickly
recalled his name when he started posting, his further postings and
e-mails certainly satisfied me of his credentials.

I also hope he continues to post as I have found his contributions
interesting.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On 30 Oct 2004 09:52:35 GMT, John Phillips
wrote:

As I understand it, the vinyl noise floor above 1 kHz can certainly
take the dynamic range of a good tape recording.

Not really, since the replay response drops at -6dB/octave above 2
kHz.

As indeed it must to be the inverse of the recording curve which rises
by the same amount. The replay curve is determined of three time
constants, 318, 3180, and 75µS.

Nice job of missing the point on two separate grounds.

(1) If you premphasize with a +6 dB octave slope, dynamic range goes down
with a minimum of a -6 dB slope.

(2) If you use a -6 dB per octave demphasis, then of course background noise
drops with a -6 dB slope compared to no demphasis.

Bottom line - vinyl has dynamic range problems at high frequencies, while
digital midia need not.

Separate topic - why vinyl also has dynamic range problems at low
frequencies.

Hi,

In message , Jim Lesurf
writes

Fortunately, the newer speakers like the 988's and 989's are much easier to
drive than old 57's... :-))

Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load are
the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end of an
Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second hand 63s
are on my shopping list.

--
Regards,
Glenn Booth

"Mike Gilmour" wrote in message


Surely both the content and the authors background lends credence to
the validity of those posts.

Agreed. On both of these grounds, the posts of SP are far more credible than
those of the now-departed IMC.

have seen Iain's name on
many IMO good recordings and I quickly recalled his name when he
started posting,

Exactly what expertise does a good list of recording credits confer on a
person? What does it mean if those credits are obtained in the context of a
large organization where individual contributions can be hard to nail down?


His further postings and e-mails certainly satisfied me of his
credentials.

This speaks to your credibility Mike. You're way to biased and far too blind
to the well-known faults of legacy audio technologies to be a credible
judge.

IMC was brought in here as some kind of a gold standard of audio expertise.
In fact his, technical feet of clay extended too far towards the tippy top
of his head, to make him very interesting to people who actually know what
they are talking about, such as SP.

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:21:48 +0000, Glenn Booth
wrote:

Hi,

In message , Jim Lesurf
writes

Fortunately, the newer speakers like the 988's and 989's are much easier to
drive than old 57's... :-))

Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load are
the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end of an
Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second hand 63s
are on my shopping list.

That classic amp had excellent load tolerance, and isn't quite
powerful enough to trip the 'crowbar' in the ESL63, so it should be a
very good match.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:21:48 +0000, Glenn Booth
wrote:


Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load are
the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end of an
Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second hand 63s
are on my shopping list.


That classic amp had excellent load tolerance, and isn't quite
powerful enough to trip the 'crowbar' in the ESL63, so it should be a
very good match.


'crowbar'? do you mean arcing?

Tat Chan wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:21:48 +0000, Glenn Booth
wrote:


Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load
are the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end
of an Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second
hand 63s are on my shopping list.



That classic amp had excellent load tolerance, and isn't quite
powerful enough to trip the 'crowbar' in the ESL63, so it should be a
very good match.


'crowbar'? do you mean arcing?

No, the first quad els was prone to arcing if overdriven, so the 63 had
a crowbar protection circuit that protected the speaker, but upset
amplifiers that didn't like driving a short circuit.

--
Nick

Nick Gorham wrote:

Tat Chan wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:21:48 +0000, Glenn Booth
wrote:


Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load
are the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the
end of an Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so
second hand 63s are on my shopping list.




That classic amp had excellent load tolerance, and isn't quite
powerful enough to trip the 'crowbar' in the ESL63, so it should be a
very good match.


'crowbar'? do you mean arcing?


No, the first quad els was prone to arcing if overdriven, so the 63 had
a crowbar protection circuit that protected the speaker, but upset
amplifiers that didn't like driving a short circuit.


Ah, thanks. So how would I know if an amp had short circuit protection?
I have the same Audiolab amp as Glenn.

Hi,

In message , Stewart
Pinkerton writes
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:21:48 +0000, Glenn Booth
wrote:

Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load are
the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end of an
Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second hand 63s
are on my shopping list.

That classic amp had excellent load tolerance, and isn't quite
powerful enough to trip the 'crowbar' in the ESL63, so it should be a
very good match.

That's good to know - thanks!

--
Regards,
Glenn Booth

In article , Glenn Booth
wrote:
Hi,

In message , Jim Lesurf
writes

Fortunately, the newer speakers like the 988's and 989's are much
easier to drive than old 57's... :-))

Sorry to change the subject in mid thread, but how difficult a load are
the ESL63s? Any opinion on whether they would be happy on the end of an
Audiolab 8000S? Sadly, the 988s are beyond my budget, so second hand 63s
are on my shopping list.

As Steward has already said, I'd expect the 8000S to be fine driving 63's.

FWIW The 63 appeared in various versions, and the input impedance did
change during its manufacturing lifetime. Don't have the details to hand,
but the 'worst' load is probably the earliest version. Early versions also
tend to have the 'push in' loudspeaker terminals.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html