There's also RMGI, now made in France by Pyral. Old BASF formulations - 911, 468, LPR35.
---------------
John, it is known that you've made tape electronics for others. Did you also keep a set for yourself?
Thanks. But I now have a better question!
I want to use a ground+power plane in addition of course to good grounding techniques, for the RF benefits. Obviously you don't want signal going through the ground plane, so except for decoupling where problems would be worse if they did not. How does use of a ground plane affect good grounding practice?
Having a separate signal ground going across the ground plane would cause errors in the signal ground according to the currents flowing in the ground plane, but if you had a power plane on the other side of the ground plane, the power return currents would magnetically cancel. My question is, would the errors in induced in the signal ground actually be worse this way than they would be without a ground plane, where the power loop currents are free to radiate?
I want to use a ground+power plane in addition of course to good grounding techniques, for the RF benefits. Obviously you don't want signal going through the ground plane, so except for decoupling where problems would be worse if they did not. How does use of a ground plane affect good grounding practice?
Having a separate signal ground going across the ground plane would cause errors in the signal ground according to the currents flowing in the ground plane, but if you had a power plane on the other side of the ground plane, the power return currents would magnetically cancel. My question is, would the errors in induced in the signal ground actually be worse this way than they would be without a ground plane, where the power loop currents are free to radiate?
Last edited:
"Listen only" are after a very different purpose to color not reproduce a given signal. There lies the hidden desire of audiophiles better than real .
Anything guitar, including the amps a really just amplified tone generators. They are judge by the musician the same way a violinist chooses a Stradivarius over a Yamaha. It disappears, it has that tone in the musicians head etc. Most audiophiles with their systems could not tell the difference between the two mentioned violins.
Would they really choose a Stradivarius?
Legendary Stradivarius Loses to New Violins in Blind Tests | LiveScience
Legendary Stradivarius Loses to New Violins in Blind Tests | LiveScience
I bet that most of you have never heard an exceptional Stradivarius violin live. I have, and I was shocked. It is not that I had not heard other quality violins over the previous year or more, I actually married a violinist, and I was sitting next to her at this recital from some famous musician, at the Institute for Advanced Musical Studies, where I worked at the time. I was so surprised that I whispered in her ear, what is that violin? She said:
:"That is your first Strad., John". After the concert, I must of spent 1/2 hour with the violinist discussing the sound of his violin.
This is where science interferes with art, when tests are made 'blind' or whatever and the results get hazy. Once the scientific tests are completed, the Stradivarius will return to being a Strad. and the world will go on as usual. Then, in some other performance, another group of people will be amazed at what they are hearing, even if they do not know what make the violin is. And so it goes!
Some will say that it is a problem with perception, but I trust my ears, they have rarely failed me, EXCEPT in ABX double blind tests set up by engineers and professors.
:"That is your first Strad., John". After the concert, I must of spent 1/2 hour with the violinist discussing the sound of his violin.
This is where science interferes with art, when tests are made 'blind' or whatever and the results get hazy. Once the scientific tests are completed, the Stradivarius will return to being a Strad. and the world will go on as usual. Then, in some other performance, another group of people will be amazed at what they are hearing, even if they do not know what make the violin is. And so it goes!
Some will say that it is a problem with perception, but I trust my ears, they have rarely failed me, EXCEPT in ABX double blind tests set up by engineers and professors.
After listening to a Rupert Neve lecture from early 2000, I was inspired as to WHY the OLD circuits often sound better than the NEW circuits? They certainly don't measure 'better' but they can make memorable recordings, and can keep the essence of the musical performance better than digital or IC based designs do.
I am putting up one of Rupert Neve's early designs from the '60's. You will find that the Ampex tape recorder circuits at the time we about the same, and I made a number of successful recordings with them. Perhaps not as good as the vacuum tube electronics that preceded them, but better than the NEXT generation of electronics in the 70's that was IC based. Rupert Neve was very specific about what he found and why. I found the same thing independently at the time and still use the same design principles, today. Perhaps we can discuss this 'simple' circuit in more detail.
I am putting up one of Rupert Neve's early designs from the '60's. You will find that the Ampex tape recorder circuits at the time we about the same, and I made a number of successful recordings with them. Perhaps not as good as the vacuum tube electronics that preceded them, but better than the NEXT generation of electronics in the 70's that was IC based. Rupert Neve was very specific about what he found and why. I found the same thing independently at the time and still use the same design principles, today. Perhaps we can discuss this 'simple' circuit in more detail.
Attachments
That Neve circuit looks like it would be quite dependent on the impedances of the stage driving it, but I can well believe something like that can weave its magic with audio. Adding a 1nf directly on an emitter follower seems a bit risky though.
I often wonder whether modern "audio design" would be more appropriately called "laboratory amplifier" design. What makes music and what is a the classic "piece of wire with gain" are not one and the same in my experience.
I often wonder whether modern "audio design" would be more appropriately called "laboratory amplifier" design. What makes music and what is a the classic "piece of wire with gain" are not one and the same in my experience.
Ignoring your usual condescension (Many of us HAVE heard all sort of fine old instruments!), here is an opposing view.
Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments | Latest | The Strad
But of course this depends on science and those pesky blind tests! But it depends on musicians - and what do they know?
Last edited:
Well Cliffforest, maybe you are right. THEN we don't have to worry about the excessive cost of old instruments, since they have 'finally' found the solution. I have spent many hours with fellow physicists on the problem, but that was some time ago.
Of course, it could be: That the blind tests were flawed and made everything sound essentially the same, but that takes 'a leap of faith' that I keep to.
Of course, it could be: That the blind tests were flawed and made everything sound essentially the same, but that takes 'a leap of faith' that I keep to.
Correct me if I am Wrong JC but does this not look some what tube like in it approach ? Look buildable with some wima mkp10 for caps ?
The simple tool for assessing is to pass the signal through the stage multiple times - what do you end up with, compared to the original? The ideal is obvious, but in the real world there are inevitable losses: if the "laboratory" version is technically more aligned to the start, but an artifact of unpleasantness has been gradually mixed in, vs. another circuit which is quite coloured by the end, but still possesses a high level of listenability, it doesn't offend the ears - then, which is 'superior'?
And the freedom (via capacitors) to allow each stage
to operate at it's optimum for AC without having to
be compromised for biasing considerations of preceding
or following stages.........
Hi John.
I understand exactly what you are saying.
My mother played a Jacobus Stainer 1669 Lion head, said by some to be even nicer than the Strads.
This violin sounds unlike any Yamaha or other modern violin.
Beautifully clean and musical, and surprising sense of power and detail, without trace of harshness.
A good violin is a pleasure to listen to, bad ones are horrid.
Dan.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.