Crosley's top end record player
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Woody wrote:

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Woody wrote:
Clearly you have never had the joy of listening to a direct cut
disc
played on a good turntable with a moving coil cartridge into
any
sort
of reasonable system. It is a really something to behold.

I've had the joy of listening to the live sound in the control
room
where
it's being balanced/recorded. Only a good digital recording comes
close to
that. Analogue tape never did, and any form of disc recording a
very
poor
second.




Old Stan Curtis has an interesting take on analogue recorders;!

And a few other audio topics.


http://www.stancurtis.com/PDFs/HiFi%20Critic%205.pdf

--


Now there was a chap who knew his onions.

If he does, he doesn't cover it fully in that article. More to
lining up
an analogue tape machine for replay than simply cleaning the heads
and
setting a level.



Stan Curtis AIR was for a while a reviewer/critic on Hi-Fi News
magazine whilst also designing amps under the Lecson and later
Cambridge Audio brands (or was it the other way around. IMSMC he
didn't pull the punches when he didn't like the design or sound of any
given amp. (Where's Jim LeSurf when you need him?)

If anyone is interested I found this web page with some details of
basic amp modules that he designed and were published in Electronics
Today International or ETI as it was always known in the early
80's-ish.

http://home.kpn.nl/a.van.waarde/Curtispre.htm

Interestingly I bought a faulty Toshiba SY-C15 preamp from a modular
hi-fi stack system from Neat audio (Neat stood for North East Audio
Traders) who had a secondhand hi-fi shop on the old GNR in Darlington
before they moved into designing and manufacturing some very nice
compact speakers at silly prices. The circuit was almost identical to
that of SC's design except that the input bootstrap pair were a single
substrate dual transistor, and the output pair were power transistors
similar to TIP29/TIP30. The fault was a blown TIP29 (equiv) in one
output stage.

Also interesting but again per SC's design the RIAA preamp used the
same circuit as the main preamp but with RIAA feedback. Line inputs
went straight to the main preamp which could also be bypassed by a
switch in effect leaving the volume control as the only item in the
signal path - it became a 'passive preamp' as the marketing bods would
later call such configuration.

Of its time it was a superb piece of kit; hum and hiss were inaudible,
it had very capable dynamics due to a well regulated PSU. The only
reason I had to get rid of it was lack of inputs!


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article , Woody
wrote:

Stan Curtis AIR was for a while a reviewer/critic on Hi-Fi News
magazine whilst also designing amps under the Lecson and later
Cambridge Audio brands (or was it the other way around. IMSMC he didn't
pull the punches when he didn't like the design or sound of any given
amp. (Where's Jim LeSurf when you need him?)

No idea. Who he? :-)

However, I think you are right, but afraid I can't recall the details of
the above so can't comment beyond that.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Crosley's top end record player
 

keskiviikko 18. lokakuuta 2017 16.48.38 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:
In article ,
Woody wrote:

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
scribeth thus
In article ,
Woody wrote:
Clearly you have never had the joy of listening to a direct cut
disc
played on a good turntable with a moving coil cartridge into any
sort
of reasonable system. It is a really something to behold.

I've had the joy of listening to the live sound in the control room
where
it's being balanced/recorded. Only a good digital recording comes
close to
that. Analogue tape never did, and any form of disc recording a very
poor
second.




Old Stan Curtis has an interesting take on analogue recorders;!

And a few other audio topics.


http://www.stancurtis.com/PDFs/HiFi%20Critic%205.pdf

--


Now there was a chap who knew his onions.

If he does, he doesn't cover it fully in that article. More to lining up
an analogue tape machine for replay than simply cleaning the heads and
setting a level.


Agreed! Setting the replay was the easy bit. Much more to it if you include demag,set up of record level, hf, and bias, on 24 tracks with Dolby SR. It was an early morning task for every studio assistant. I wonder what they do these days, uploads and downloads probably, and of course make coffee strong enough to dissolve the spoon. Some things never change:-)

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

keskiviikko 18. lokakuuta 2017 0.58.33 UTC+3 tony sayer kirjoitti:


Old Stan Curtis has an interesting take on analogue recorders;!

Much more important than the view of a manufacturer is your own opinion -even more so if based on personal experience. Analogue tape, which was after all state of the art for forty years, was used to make thousand of fine recordings, which have delighted audiences the world over, and was particularly good after the introduction of Dolby A in the mid 60's.

It is interesting to note that many pop musicians favour studios where they can record on 2" analogue multitrack (Studer A80/24 with Dolby SR is a particular favourite) and edit and mix in digital.

Many mastering facilities have a stereo Studer A80 for clients who ask for an analogue pass as a part of the premastering stage. Why do you think that might be?

I tend to associate various recording/reproducer techniques with certain type of music, (and accept their strengths and weaknesses). To me, 20s and 30s jazz sounds best from shellac on a wind up gramophone, and Jethro Tull from a Garrard 401, SME arm and Shure V15 takes a lot of beating:-)

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

torstai 12. lokakuuta 2017 4.59.51 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:



Wouldn't a recording be 'going through' the tape, like on a 3 head
cassette deck? No idea, perhaps not.

Yes. Monitoring is usually off tape. You do have the possibility to switch to Line In if you wish, for comparison.

If what you say is the general case, it does make me wonder how much
better all the analogue recordings could have been.

In what way could they have been better, Rob?, giving the technology available at the time?

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

On 21/10/2017 22:11, Iain wrote:
torstai 12. lokakuuta 2017 4.59.51 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:



Wouldn't a recording be 'going through' the tape, like on a 3 head
cassette deck? No idea, perhaps not.

Yes. Monitoring is usually off tape. You do have the possibility to switch to Line In if you wish, for comparison.

If what you say is the general case, it does make me wonder how much
better all the analogue recordings could have been.

In what way could they have been better, Rob?, giving the technology available at the time?


Well, given the observation by Dave P that only digital recording was
'close' to the line-through sound monitored in the control room.
Analogue was 'never close'.

I am surprised that's the case, but anyhoo, I've never been in a
control room, let alone worked in one.

And it does make me wonder what, say, the Beatles/Floyd recordings would
have been like, and how blokes like Neil Young manage in the face of
this. I think they/their work sounds pretty superb as is.

Maybe Dave's talking about the experience of a control room using top
rate speakers and listening environment etc as opposed to a domestic
setting. And 'not close to the original' for him is a decent
approximation for the rest of us.

Even so, I'm still surprised, and wouldn't mind a day with Steve Albini :-)

--
Cheers, Rob

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article ,
RJH wrote:
On 21/10/2017 22:11, Iain wrote:
torstai 12. lokakuuta 2017 4.59.51 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:



Wouldn't a recording be 'going through' the tape, like on a 3 head
cassette deck? No idea, perhaps not.

Yes. Monitoring is usually off tape. You do have the possibility to switch to Line In if you wish, for comparison.

If what you say is the general case, it does make me wonder how much
better all the analogue recordings could have been.

In what way could they have been better, Rob?, giving the technology available at the time?


Well, given the observation by Dave P that only digital recording was
'close' to the line-through sound monitored in the control room.
Analogue was 'never close'.

In that you could clearly hear a difference, if in a position to compare
them. But not saying the analogue recording was dreadful.

I am surprised that's the case, but anyhoo, I've never been in a
control room, let alone worked in one.

You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

And it does make me wonder what, say, the Beatles/Floyd recordings would
have been like, and how blokes like Neil Young manage in the face of
this. I think they/their work sounds pretty superb as is.

The original wax cylinders would have sounded good too. At the time.

Maybe Dave's talking about the experience of a control room using top
rate speakers and listening environment etc as opposed to a domestic
setting. And 'not close to the original' for him is a decent
approximation for the rest of us.

Just a simple fact. Not in the least trying to say analogue can't give
results which delight.

I'll try and give a simple analogy. If you save, say, a text document
created on your computer, it can be copied as many times as you want, and
look exactly the same. Now try saving a screen shot of it as a TIFF or
whatever. It should look quite good. Now enlarge that TIFF and the text
will go all fuzzy. Not so with the original file.

Of course that's not exactly the same - but sort of shows what I mean.

Even so, I'm still surprised, and wouldn't mind a day with Steve Albini :-)

--
*Filthy stinking rich -- well, two out of three ain't bad

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Crosley's top end record player
 

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 11.41.48 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:
On 21/10/2017 22:11, Iain wrote:
torstai 12. lokakuuta 2017 4.59.51 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:



Wouldn't a recording be 'going through' the tape, like on a 3 head
cassette deck? No idea, perhaps not.

Yes. Monitoring is usually off tape. You do have the possibility to switch to Line In if you wish, for comparison.

If what you say is the general case, it does make me wonder how much
better all the analogue recordings could have been.

In what way could they have been better, Rob?, giving the technology available at the time?


Well, given the observation by Dave P that only digital recording was
'close' to the line-through sound monitored in the control room.
Analogue was 'never close'.

That is Dave's personal opinion (to which he is fully entitled:-)
Replay from a professional analogue recorder with Dolby A or SR was incredibly close.

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder, Studer A80
or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

On 22/10/2017 13:59, Iain wrote:
sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder, Studer A80
or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.


True, but one of the few domestic recorders that had separate record and
replay heads so you could monitor a recording off tape. I think Akai
made one as well for a while.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2017 13:59, Iain wrote:
sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a
Revox, by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder,
Studer A80 or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.


True, but one of the few domestic recorders that had separate record and
replay heads so you could monitor a recording off tape. I think Akai
made one as well for a while.

I'd not dream of comparing any reel to reel recorder without Dolby SR to
one with it. I'll leave that to others.

However, a Revox in top condition and alignment will come very close to
any similar pro machine ever made.

--
*The most wasted day of all is one in which we have not laughed.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article , Iain
wrote:

It is interesting to note that many pop musicians favour studios where
they can record on 2" analogue multitrack (Studer A80/24 with Dolby SR
is a particular favourite) and edit and mix in digital.

Aren't there also various 'plug ins', etc, for digital work systems which
people buy to make the results sound like they've been recorded on ye olde
analogue reel-to-reel? Given this, is this all about an 'effect' rather
than being faithful to the sounds hitting the mics?

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Crosley's top end record player
 

On 21/10/2017 22:03, Iain wrote:
Many mastering facilities have a stereo Studer A80 for clients who ask for an analogue pass as a part of the premastering stage. Why do you think that might be?

Because some clients ask for it, and they might go somewhere else if it
isn't available.

That doesn't tell us if the studios think it is good, bad, or makes no
difference.

Andy

Crosley's top end record player
 

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 17.36.46 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:
In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/10/2017 13:59, Iain wrote:
sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a
Revox, by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder,
Studer A80 or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.


True, but one of the few domestic recorders that had separate record and
replay heads so you could monitor a recording off tape. I think Akai
made one as well for a while.

I'd not dream of comparing any reel to reel recorder without Dolby SR to
one with it. I'll leave that to others.

However, a Revox in top condition and alignment will come very close to
any similar pro machine ever made.

Not even close.

How long do you think a Revox would last working 24/7. How many times a day would you need to re align it, with sixty musicians sitting waiting in the studio.

Have you ever tried to edit between the same recording made on two identical Revox machines??


That's why Willi Studer kept the professional (Studer) and domestic machines (Revox) apart.

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 11.41.48 UTC+3 RJH kirjoitti:

Well, given the observation by Dave P that only digital recording was
'close' to the line-through sound monitored in the control room.
Analogue was 'never close'.

I am surprised that's the case, but anyhoo, I've never been in a
control room, let alone worked in one.


A digital set up in not quite so interesting for the visitor as a large analogue recording system.

Analogue desks are usually physically quite large. Three people can work side by side. Each channel strip has its own fader and sections for equalisation, pan, routing, aux sends, reverb send etc etc, and then in addition there are track strips (usually 24) with track faders and monitor routing etc etc. So a 32 channel 24 track console is quite a monster with 60 faders/channel strips (including two stereo pairs :-) and a meter for each channel or track.

And with two Studer, Ampex or Scully multitrack recorders, plus perhaps an eight track on 1" and two or three large stereo recorders, and racks of Dolby that go with them, the analogue control room is quite an exciting place.

It is quite common for people to ask, "How many knobs and switches are there? Do you use them all? :-)

Digital consoles can be much more compact, and fit in to a flight case which one person can carry without difficulty. There are countless variants, but the in-line format means that you don't necessarily need track faders, as you can quickly reasign between record and mix, and things like EQ, aux sends, effects etc can be reached by pressing the "Select" for the channel in question and then a button labelled EQ. The equaliser for the channel selected comes up on the screen, and you can adjust the settings using a cursor an a digital encoder wheel. Easy and fun:-)

Many analogue consoles had automation, and programmable "flying faders" so that you could build a mix and hone it to perfection pass by pass.

Digital consoles go a lot further. Each engineer can enter and save his/her favourite topologies, set up a title, and then clone the set-up for as many subsquent titles as you need with pans, reverb, foldback mix etc, without having to set them up individually. You can set up and save whole "Scenes", which might be totally different from each other, and switch between them instantly.

Great fun:-)

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 18.55.12 UTC+3 Jim Lesurf kirjoitti:


Aren't there also various 'plug ins', etc, for digital work systems which
people buy to make the results sound like they've been recorded on ye olde
analogue reel-to-reel? Given this, is this all about an 'effect' rather
than being faithful to the sounds hitting the mics?

There are indeed. Some of them are pretty good:-)
Much of what we call popular music has little to do with faithfulness to the sound hitting the mics.



Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article ,
Vir Campestris wrote:
On 21/10/2017 22:03, Iain wrote:
Many mastering facilities have a stereo Studer A80 for clients who ask
for an analogue pass as a part of the premastering stage. Why do you
think that might be?

Because some clients ask for it, and they might go somewhere else if it
isn't available.

Wonder if it's that Mr Churches hires out such a machine is the reason he
seems to think an A80 the ultimate R to R? The much later A827 was
superior, especially as regards tape handling. And more stable electronics
too.

That doesn't tell us if the studios think it is good, bad, or makes no
difference.

Quite. Merely another outboard. They might want to use a Melotron too, for
that authentic sound.

--
*If horrific means to make horrible, does terrific mean to make terrible?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Crosley's top end record player
 

maanantai 23. lokakuuta 2017 2.39.31 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:

Wonder if it's that Mr Churches hires out such a machine is the reason he
seems to think an A80 the ultimate R to R? The much later A827 was
superior, especially as regards tape handling. And more stable electronics
too.

The A80, especially the wide body version with integral Dolby, is still the machine of choice for people who know about multitracks. It sold in far greater numbers that either the A800 or A827, and the fact that so many of them are still in daily use speaks for the build quality.

Best regards
Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article , Iain
wrote:
sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 18.55.12 UTC+3 Jim Lesurf kirjoitti:


Aren't there also various 'plug ins', etc, for digital work systems
which people buy to make the results sound like they've been recorded
on ye olde analogue reel-to-reel? Given this, is this all about an
'effect' rather than being faithful to the sounds hitting the mics?

There are indeed. Some of them are pretty good:-) Much of what we call
popular music has little to do with faithfulness to the sound hitting
the mics.

That's what I've thought. :-)

It also throws a stark light on some of the dafter claims made by the
proponents of MQA.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Crosley's top end record player
 

maanantai 23. lokakuuta 2017 12.15.01 UTC+3 Jim Lesurf kirjoitti:
In article , Iain
wrote:
sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 18.55.12 UTC+3 Jim Lesurf kirjoitti:


Aren't there also various 'plug ins', etc, for digital work systems
which people buy to make the results sound like they've been recorded
on ye olde analogue reel-to-reel? Given this, is this all about an
'effect' rather than being faithful to the sounds hitting the mics?

There are indeed. Some of them are pretty good:-) Much of what we call
popular music has little to do with faithfulness to the sound hitting
the mics.

That's what I've thought. :-)

One of the British producers/engineers I admired the most, Gus Dudgeon, used to say that the microphone is just a link in the chain of devices used to store audio. After this, the work really begins!

Back in the sixties, a British company, ADR introduced a pieced of equipment known as the Vocal Stressor, a compex, which despite its name was also very effective on guitars etc. It had a self contained three-band equaliser, and compressor, gate, and expander which could be linked together in the order of your choice.

The modern equivalent "The Vocal Channel" built by Art Audio is also a very versatile but inexpensive audio tool and seen everywhere.


You are correct in that the finished product has very little to do with the sound that hit the mics originally. Much of the music making process is an illusion - starting with the creation stereo sound stage (which does not actually exist:-) and then the adding of an acoustic (often different for vocals and each instrument or group of instruments) that is not remotely related to the location in which the music is recorded.

It would be fun to publish a pop recording mixed from just the raw mic sound - no EQ, no compressors, no gates, no expanders, no reverb, no delays, no digi effects. It would certainly raise a few eyebrows:-)

Best regards
Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 05:59:37 -0700, Iain wrote:

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a
Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder,
Studer A80 or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.

And, not even in the same league as an Akai GX630DB or a GX747. :-)

--
Johnny B Good

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 05:59:37 -0700, Iain wrote:

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a
Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder,
Studer A80 or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.

And, not even in the same league as an Akai GX630DB or a GX747. :-)

Pro recorders are optimised for the higher speeds - usually 15 ips. But
most will also do 7 1/2. Not at all surprising to find a decent domestic
machine that will beat the pro one at 7 1/2.

--
*Certain frogs can be frozen solid, then thawed, and survive *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Crosley's top end record player
 

keskiviikko 25. lokakuuta 2017 1.51.47 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News) kirjoitti:


Pro recorders are optimised for the higher speeds - usually 15 ips. But
most will also do 7 1/2. Not at all surprising to find a decent domestic
machine that will beat the pro one at 7 1/2.

Indeed. The tape speeds for professional machines are 38cm/s (15 ips) and 76 cm/s (30 ips) Some machines have 7.5 ips which is useful for making listening copies for artists. Not much else.

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

tiistai 24. lokakuuta 2017 22.58.08 UTC+3 Johnny B Good kirjoitti:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 05:59:37 -0700, Iain wrote:

sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2017 12.35.51 UTC+3 Dave Plowman (News)
kirjoitti:


You could hear similar on a decent high end domestic R to R like a
Revox,
by switching between input and off tape output.

Don't compare a Revox with a professionally set-up studio recorder,
Studer A80 or Ampex A440 with Dolby SR.

The Revox is not even in the same league.

And, not even in the same league as an Akai GX630DB or a GX747. :-)

:-))

Some years ago, I used to mix musicals for a semi-pro theatre group. They had two Revox machines. As the performance was non-stop, we had the idea to start the second machine just a few minutes before the tape on the first machine ran out, and splice between them :-) I could even detect edits in made in the ambience, and inaudible splices in the music were all but impossible.

I explained the problems I was having to the theatre technician. He stayed late after the rehearsal to clean and demag the heads, and set both machines up with an SAT. After the second performance, the situation had not improved.

The next day I took two Studer B62s with me, and used them for the rest of the week, editing between them without the slightest problem.

Iain

Crosley's top end record player
 

On 11/10/17 11:49, Woody wrote:
"Adrian Caspersz" wrote in message

Currently I'm shopping for a new cart for a Rega P3-24, the stock
harsh sibilant bassless Rega Bias 2 cart I want to get shot of.

The prices of all the half decent ones have recently accelerated
into the hundreds with the exception of the £30 AT95e which I may
end up with.


The AT95e has been around for years and years and is well tried and
tested, like the one what I have got.

Also consider looking at Ortofon who are very much still around and
make a good product.

Bit the bullet yesterday and installed a new Rega Elys 2 cart. Even yet
though not fully run in, it's got a lot better channel separation,
presence of the vocalist, punching bass, very low surface noise and good
percussion. The last I'm expecting to improve.

Everything that the Rega Bias 2 was not.

Actually, that's a bit of a relief - because adding other carts means
having to raise the height of the arm with a VTA spacer, and raise the
plastic cover to avoid the counter weight. Or change the counter weight.
The cost of mods ...

Hapilly, I'm now currently running through and enjoying my vinyl
collection. Back then, with limited funds, I took more care selecting
the best of the rest - and audio memory things come flooding back, that
a Pioneer PL-12D made great replay back then in the early 80s.

For kicks I've recently picked up a secondhand PL-12D / M75ED
combination. The deck needs a bit of work (motor hum through the
suspension & spindle), and further away from fidelity than the Rega -
But I'm still keen to make it do something.

I've just been on a food shopping trip to Morrisons. Just on the way
out, past the newspaper and birthday card displays, they have stuck up a
tall display of classic rock albums - most on heavy vinyl and an
impressive sticker price. They will be discounted after Christmas...

A year ago I was in a branch of Fry's Electronics in the US, marvelling
at a similar display of LPs at similar crazy prices.

This didn't happen last time they announced a vinyl revival.

But, I'm a bit more 'charity shop' in my sources ...

:-)


Now if you can tell me where I can get a stylus for my AT30 moving
coil cartridge........


OOI tried looking. Hens teeth might perhaps be more of a proposition, if
they fit the cart ...

--
Adrian C

Crosley's top end record player
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Iain wrote:

Much of what we call popular music has little to do with
faithfulness to the sound hitting the mics.

That's what I've thought. :-)
It also throws a stark light on some of the dafter claims made by the
proponents of MQA.

Recent CCC talk on MQA

https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9113-mqa_-_a_clever_stealth_drm-trojan

Crosley's top end record player
 

In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Iain wrote:

Much of what we call popular music has little to do with faithfulness
to the sound hitting the mics.

That's what I've thought. :-) It also throws a stark light on some of
the dafter claims made by the proponents of MQA.

Recent CCC talk on MQA

https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9113-mqa_-_a_clever_stealth_drm-trojan


Interesting. Not tried the video yet as it would be a 300MB download. But
the blurb seems fair enough as a summary.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa...o/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Crosley's top end record player
 

Jim Lesurf wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9113-mqa_-_a_clever_stealth_drm-trojan

Interesting. Not tried the video yet as it would be a 300MB download. But
the blurb seems fair enough as a summary.

Not quite as interesting as I had hoped, one of the presenters doesn't
have "the knack"

Crosley's top end record player
 

On 08/01/2018 10:15, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Andy Burns
wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Iain wrote:

Much of what we call popular music has little to do with faithfulness
to the sound hitting the mics.

That's what I've thought. :-) It also throws a stark light on some of
the dafter claims made by the proponents of MQA.

Recent CCC talk on MQA

https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9113-mqa_-_a_clever_stealth_drm-trojan


Interesting. Not tried the video yet as it would be a 300MB download. But
the blurb seems fair enough as a summary.


Can't comment on the interesting (!) but 300MB for a 1 hour video seems,
to me, trivial - just a few 10s of seconds here.

I've noticed this with a few on this NG over the past 10 years or so
when we used to post audio files - are many of you still on a metered or
dial up internet still? Or 1TB storage? Or something?


--
Cheers, Rob