Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:00:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


Mic very close to speaker, yes? And not directly in line with the
tweeter. This the first mic recording of yours where the direct
recording has been brighter than the mic recording. So I'm guessing
you used the IMFs and a pair of cardioids, if not the ribbons.


OK, here's a 'back to normal' for you - this is the setup (as usual):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/AKG2A3Fidelios.wmv


....and here's the last two tracks of Side 1 with the same AKG cart, but
back on my 2A3 SET/Fidelios (or 'normal' as I call it) and with the
Oktavas:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/BackToNormal.mp3


More *spanky* than *phat slam* this time (my preference), but do play it
loud!!

(Feck - even the movie's got *clout*!! :-)


No good for me :-( we're back in screechy-land again...

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:00:36 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


Mic very close to speaker, yes? And not directly in line with the
tweeter. This the first mic recording of yours where the direct
recording has been brighter than the mic recording. So I'm guessing
you used the IMFs and a pair of cardioids, if not the ribbons.


OK, here's a 'back to normal' for you - this is the setup (as usual):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/AKG2A3Fidelios.wmv


....and here's the last two tracks of Side 1 with the same AKG cart,
but
back on my 2A3 SET/Fidelios (or 'normal' as I call it) and with the
Oktavas:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/BackToNormal.mp3


More *spanky* than *phat slam* this time (my preference), but do play
it
loud!!

(Feck - even the movie's got *clout*!! :-)


No good for me :-( we're back in screechy-land again...


Hokay....

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

Keith G wrote:
Put your best cans on and wick it up as *large* as you can stand; then
take a grip of summat that bolted to the floor!! (Not for the Quad
Squad!! ;-)


Get the 7" of Jocelyn Brown's 'Someone Elses Guy'. Nice bit of dynamics
to the start of that when the bass kicks. Might upset some decks though.

--
Adrian C

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote


Mic very close to speaker, yes?


Yes, the usual - about 9 inches, but not the usual mics.


And not directly in line with the
tweeter.


Correct - about in line with the bass units. (It was the *slam* I was
after!)

This means that what you recorded will probably sound quite
unrepresentive
of what the sound is like out in the room.


Absolutely right.

When I post soundclips they are mostly (usually only) for Don's benefit
as few other have ever commented. I know he is a capable and experienced
listener and can probably *hear through* the obvious
artifacts/distortions. (It normally takes 3 or 4 passes for most people
to break down the *strangeness* of a new 'sound!) But the fact is he's a
*subwoofer user* and I'm not; I have never been able to tolerate one for
more than a few minutes - I don't even use one for movies! Don and I
would never choose the same system - not for vinyl, at least....

(I can and do use 'blameless audio' for radio and movies most of the
time... ;-)




That's *on paper* - anybody/everybody knows you get much better
*phat*
slam in the real world from vinyl!! (This is about *sound* - not
*signal*; you can forget the figures when it comes to hosing the
actual
noise about..!! :-)

You can certainly ignore the figures, or be ignorant of them, or have
no
idea how to interpret what they mean... I don't think that "everybody"
falls into that category, though, although it may be true of many...
:-)


:-)

Even the manufacturers throw the figures out when it comes to
engineering a little 'cut and lift' in here and there to create a
*sound* do they not...??

Valve Sound = sound with *balls*..???
 

"Keith G" wrote


(I can and do use 'blameless audio' for radio and movies most of the
time... ;-)


Er, scrub that - I've just cut Johnny WAD (32Watt KT88 PP amp) into the
equation (rainy day fiddling, like you do) and I foresee changes coming!
On the IMFs with a CD on, it's just kicked the Technics' scrawny (100W?)
SS arse into the weeds! Talk about *adding life* to the procedings - and
no wonder some [1] say a single 'valve Watt' is worth at least *two* 'SS
Watts'..!!

:-)


[1] Actually, the last person to say that to me was L*n Gr*gory, the
Cartridge Man, but let's not go there....!!

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...


You can certainly ignore the figures, or be ignorant of them, or have
no idea how to interpret what they mean... I don't think that
"everybody" falls into that category, though, although it may be true
of many...
:-)


:-)

Even the manufacturers throw the figures out when it comes to
engineering a little 'cut and lift' in here and there to create a
*sound* do they not...??

Yes, some makers do indeed choose to alter the sound you will get in
deliberate ways. Other may do so without having any clear idea what they
are doing. :-) But that does not mean they all do this, nor intend it. Nor
may the results be what those who made a recording intended.

Slainte,

Jim

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

Valve Sound = sound with *balls*..???
 

On Oct 16, 7:33 am, "Keith G" wrote:
"Keith G" wrote

(I can and do use 'blameless audio' for radio and movies most of the
time... ;-)

Er, scrub that - I've just cut Johnny WAD (32Watt KT88 PP amp) into the
equation (rainy day fiddling, like you do) and I foresee changes coming!
On the IMFs with a CD on, it's just kicked the Technics' scrawny (100W?)
SS arse into the weeds! Talk about *adding life* to the procedings - and
no wonder some [1] say a single 'valve Watt' is worth at least *two* 'SS
Watts'..!!

:-)

[1] Actually, the last person to say that to me was L*n Gr*gory, the
Cartridge Man, but let's not go there....!!

Phil is right about you, Keith. You're a limp Brit wimp, just like
those pretenders at WAD. Real tubies build real valve amp kits, like
my Velleman K4000, three EL34 per side for 18W in Class A and 101W in
Class B (measured, they claim only 16/96W). Now that is an amp that
leaves hairy footprints. And no cheap pseudo-Chinese **** either. When
you've paid for a K4000, you know your wallet hurts because the K4000
left hairy footprints on it.

Andre Jute

PS The K4000 sounds great too, especially in Class A, and in Class B
is a monster driver for any loudspeaker that can put out decent bass.
Velleman's K4000 leaves not only any solid state amp for dead, but a
lot of precious "golden ear" legends as well, and it does it with such
power and style that this jekyll and hyde of an amp is a superior
match for the refined Quad ESL-63 even on the most revealing music of
all, voices a capella.

Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...


You can certainly ignore the figures, or be ignorant of them, or
have
no idea how to interpret what they mean... I don't think that
"everybody" falls into that category, though, although it may be
true
of many...
:-)


:-)

Even the manufacturers throw the figures out when it comes to
engineering a little 'cut and lift' in here and there to create a
*sound* do they not...??

Yes, some makers do indeed choose to alter the sound you will get in
deliberate ways. Other may do so without having any clear idea what
they
are doing. :-) But that does not mean they all do this, nor intend it.
Nor
may the results be what those who made a recording intended.


The minute you touch the Tone Controls (or Volume Control, come to that)
you start to *tailor* the music to your own requirements....

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

How can a spherical stylus produce sound with 'balls?'












Surely everyone knows happines is egg-shaped? (i.e. eliptical.)




--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

Spherical stylus = sound with *balls*..???
 

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

Even the manufacturers throw the figures out when it comes to
engineering a little 'cut and lift' in here and there to create a
*sound* do they not...??

Yes, some makers do indeed choose to alter the sound you will get in
deliberate ways. Other may do so without having any clear idea what
they are doing. :-) But that does not mean they all do this, nor
intend it. Nor may the results be what those who made a recording
intended.


The minute you touch the Tone Controls (or Volume Control, come to that)
you start to *tailor* the music to your own requirements....

Indeed. Just as moving your listening location or speaker positions. But
the advantage of tone control adjustments is that you can alter them as you
wish even whilst music is playing, or bypass them, and you have detailed
control over the changes. It also allows you to avoid the groove wall
damage which a spherical tip might cause, thus altering the LP when played
again in future even with a different stylus.

Slainte,

Jim

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