"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 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.


Yes, the IMFs and my (cardioid) CAD GXL2400s - rebadged OEM Shuaiyin
mics which were cheap and which I use for 'dirty work'; not the ribbon
(also rebadged Shuaiyin) - I only have one of those and I wouldn't
subject it to that sort of behaviour!!



Dynamic range is good for vinyl at about 50dB, but there's still
better than another 40 to go before you would start seeing a CD
sweating.


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..!! :-)

On 15 Oct, 16:30, "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 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.

Yes, the IMFs and my (cardioid) CAD GXL2400s - rebadged OEM Shuaiyin
mics which were cheap and which I use for 'dirty work'; not the ribbon
(also rebadged Shuaiyin) - I only have one of those and I wouldn't
subject it to that sort of behaviour!!



Dynamic range is good for vinyl at about 50dB, but there's still
better than another 40 to go before you would start seeing a CD
sweating.

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..!! :-)

Keith

I'm not sure I know what phat slam is, but I know what small changes
to frequency response sound like.

A few years ago I spent ages optimising the loading of my Shure V15/3
and the flatter the response became (within fractions of a dB,
measured with a test disk) the more it sounded like my CD player with
the same album. Very close in the end. So if your AKG cartridge
sounds very different from a CD player it is probably not very good.

I was never able to get the bass as punchy from the LP though (I think
LPs are quite restricted at low frequencies to avoid mis-tracking) and
of course there was always the crackle and pop in the background.

Regards

Paul

wrote



I'm not sure I know what phat slam is, but I know what small changes
to frequency response sound like.

A few years ago I spent ages optimising the loading of my Shure V15/3
and the flatter the response became (within fractions of a dB,
measured with a test disk) the more it sounded like my CD player with
the same album. Very close in the end. So if your AKG cartridge
sounds very different from a CD player it is probably not very good.

I was never able to get the bass as punchy from the LP though (I think
LPs are quite restricted at low frequencies to avoid mis-tracking) and
of course there was always the crackle and pop in the background.



OK, then - what bits of QUAD kit do you have...??

:-)

In article .com,
wrote:


A few years ago I spent ages optimising the loading of my Shure V15/3
and the flatter the response became (within fractions of a dB, measured
with a test disk) the more it sounded like my CD player with the same
album.

Also my experience with the V15 when comparing classical music on the same
LP/CD.

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

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.


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... :-)

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

"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...??

"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....!!

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

"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com...


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. Phil is no more right about Keith than he is about Jim, Don, Nick,
Patrick or anyone else that he attempted to defame over the years.

Phil has the social skills of a raccoon. Most of what he posts to Usenet is
comprised of cut and paste expletives . Every now and again, he
seems to emerge from severe dysfunctionality and does post something
of great interest. Such occurrences are becoming rarer.

Interesting you should mention the Velleman. It is indeed a good sounding
amp. It is a long time since I have seen a K4000, but I seem to recollect
it had four EL34's in push pull parallel per side.

It seems as though the K4000 is discontinued.
I listened to a 4040 not too long ago, with a pair of splendid Tannoy
Canterbury
SE speakers. Very pleasing indeed. The amp was running far below its full
power potential. The noise floor was exceptionally low. Later, a quick
look on the bench revealed the noise floor to be 100µV, so a
SNR of 105dB and at 96W, the THD was only 0.1%

The Belgians know how to make more than just chocolates:-)

Regards
Iain

"Iain Cherchus"

"Andre Jute"

Phil is right about you, Keith. You're a limp Brit wimp, just like


Andre. Phil is no more right about Keith than he is about Jim, Don, Nick,
Patrick


** I am 100 % right about each of those dangerous morons.

I am also 100 % right about the Iain Cherchus autistic criminal.

Shooting would be far too kind for the likes of him.





........ Phil