Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

Eeyore wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Don Pearce wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
David Looser wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arny Krueger wrote:

The noise floor of a well-made recording is on the order of 75-80 dB.
Have you gone completely MAD ?

I can beat you by easily 50dB.
Do you do all your recording in an anechoic chamber then?
What do you think the noise floor of a competently designed studio is ?
I think Arny meant S/N ratio rather than noise floor.
I sense evasion here.


A decent studio will be somewhere around the 20dB mark.
Not in my book.


It is the exceptional studio that is much below that, and you won't find it
in a city.
Yes you can when it's really good and it'll be 10-12 dBA. Not all parts of
cities are that noisy and it's amazing what clever construction methods can
do.

The biggest problem is keeping the noise of the air conditioning down
actually.
If you are measuring in dBa then sure, no problem. Most of the residual
SPL is structure-borne LF stuff that is seriously expensive to eliminate.

PROVE IT. I hope you have the instrumentation. I hope for my part I can arrange
access to a suitable studio.

Graham


Of course I'm not going to prove it - I have a life to live. But are you
seriously telling me you didn't know this?

d

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

David Looser wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Based on my experiences with live recording in several dozen different
venues, the microphones, even those with noise in the 18 to 20 dB range,
are usually quieter than the venue by quite a bit. If it wasn't for the
venues and the performers, recodrings with dynamic range of up to 90 dB
would be pretty common.

Exactly, hence my question to Graham (which he never answered)

Sorry.

Care to try again. Occasionally busy groups mean I miss the occasional post.


as to whether he made all his recordings in an anechoic chamber

Well no, that would be stupid. Ever been in one btw ? It's Weird.

I fail to see any relevance.

Graham

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

On 2008-06-19, Alan White wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:34:57 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:


That is also my recollection. I can't remember when the first work on
dither was done, but I think it was produced a long time ago. Hence there
really isn't much excuse for someone writing magazine articles like NKs not
to understand it. I was certainly reading about such matters long ago.
...

Dither was certainly used in the BBC thirteen channel PCM coders used
for the BBC radio distribution network in 1972(?)

In which case the speculation I have occasionally seen on the web that
some early CDs lacked dither is probably inaccurate.

--
John Phillips

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


David Looser wrote:


Exactly, hence my question to Graham (which he never answered)

Sorry.

Care to try again. Occasionally busy groups mean I miss the occasional
post.

My apologies, after posting the above I found your reply.

as to whether he made all his recordings in an anechoic chamber

Well no, that would be stupid. Ever been in one btw ? It's Weird.

Indeed I have, many times (testing transducers). As you say it's weird.

I fail to see any relevance.

The relevance is that however quiet a studio when empty, put people in it
and the noise level rises appreciably even if they aren't doing anything in
particular (let alone performing). People are surprisingly noisy things,
what with the heartbeat, blood-flow, breathing, digestion etc., if they move
you get the rustle of clothing. But in an anechoic chamber that noise is
absorbed.

David.

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

130 dB takes an aircraft carrier launching jets, etc.
It also causes real pain (not just discomfort) and temporary damage to the
hearing. If continued for any length of time (minutes) the damage is
permanent.

David.

Eeysore Criminal Pommy CHARLATAN
 

"Eeysore Criminal Pommy CHARLATAN"

Don't even get me started.


** LOL - would sure like to FINISH you once and for all

- you vile fake.


Why do you think there were Apogee filter
upgrades for PCM3324As and the like ?


** Yawn....

Snake oil remedies sold for sky high prices made lots of money for those
crooks.


BTW:

Apogee was begun and owned by an Australian ****** called Bruce Jackson.

He started a PA hire company ( Jands ) here in Sydney in the late 60s, then
sold it and went to the USA to become sound guy for Elvis Presley in the
early 1970s.

That is when I met up with him in Sydney.

Wot a smug and arrogant ******.



...... Phil

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Don Pearce"

Of course I'm not going to prove it - I have a life to live. But are you
seriously telling me you didn't know this?


** Stevenson is a MONUMENTALLY ignorant fake.

The lying pig knows SFA about any damn thing.

Got no idea how to pick a narcissistic nut case with Asperger's ?

One yourself ?

Of course.



....... Phil

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Arny Krueger"

130 dB takes an aircraft carrier launching jets, etc.


** Stick a mic right up against the skin of a snare drum - then get an ape
man type drummer to hit the drum as hard as he can. It's insane, but so are
all of Graham Stevenson's bizarre points.

Cos he is a total nut case.

Wake up Arny.

I warned you about " TT" ages ago and you ignored me.

Wake up.



...... Phil

Stevenson = LYING MORON
 

" Graham Stevenson the ASD ****ed LIAR and

****ING INSANE OVER SNIPPER !!!!!!!!!!!!! "


Jim Lesurf wrote:

I'd be interested in seeing data on the noise performance of studio
mics and preamps, etc.

Neumann TLM103. Equivalent noise floor of 7dBA

** The CCIR "equivalent noise level " figure is 17.5 dB.

** Replacing the snipped link.

http://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=c...id=tlm103_data

Unweighted of course.

** Absolutely not true !!!!!!!!!!!

Read your *OWN* damn link !!!

You lying, ASD ****ed, criminal pommy **** !!


The CCIR 468-3 weighing curve is nothing like flat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU-R_468_noise_weighting

It flatters condenser mics by removing the majority of their LF noise
output - more so than A weighting does.

YOU ****ING IDIOT !!!!!!!!!!!!!




...... Phil

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

In article , John Phillips
wrote:
On 2008-06-19, Alan White wrote:


Dither was certainly used in the BBC thirteen channel PCM coders used
for the BBC radio distribution network in 1972(?)

In which case the speculation I have occasionally seen on the web that
some early CDs lacked dither is probably inaccurate.

Not necessarily. The fact that some people knew what dither was, and why it
might be required, does not guarantee that everyone making every CD falls
within this class of people. Although they may well have been saved by the
noise levels on the original analogue tapes where they were used as the
source. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Change 'noise' to 'jcgl' if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html