For me, "Motown" recordings are quite the opposite from what you describe. I would say you are pointing to "Atlantic" recordings 
George
George; he describes results of intermodulation. As Johannes mentioned, the record has low dynamic range, that means low intermodulation on high power is vital for such records. That means, the amp with tons of feedback is prescribed.
In that key period of the mid 60's the vocals on most of the recordings are very touchy, too much bite and edge, which of course is another word for distortion. The relatively immature SS recording gear did the sound no favours ...
George
Frank
Are you still talking about that simple LCR circuit problem you posted awhile back, where you asked for the power disipated? I'd use mesh current or node voltage technique, phasors, and power equations to solve it. Or is this another problem? Can you point me to it?
Now, you are going to be flamed.
Anyway, what I wrote holds true for me from my high school days (parties) till today. That is, it doesn’t have to do with the fidelity of the reproduction equipment
Ana Popovic - Unconditional @ Musiktheater Piano Dortmund 02.04.2011 - YouTube
I am with morinix here
George
Last edited:
Now, you are going to be flamed.
It's Ok. Flame is a good excuse to explain once more the truth about feedback. However, when I have some spare time to do so.
Flame means emotions. Emotions help to remember better.
I stand corrected, there seems to be a few stories out there about what equipment was being used, and the approach to doing recordings; I do note that in that interview they mention having both a transistor, and tube studio.
Whatever the "truth" be, I certainly find a lot of the Motown material difficult to pull off, whether because of the state of tune of the gear, or the way it was being used. Unlike that from the Golden Years, late 50's, which is like honey in comparison ...
Frank
I would like to bring something out about using feedback. I USE FEEDBACK in virtually all my designs. The Parasound JC-1 power amp, the JC-2 preamp, and the JC-3 IC based phono stage, ALL use lots of feedback. I almost NEVER use less than 20dB, and usually 40dB or more. I do this for SPECS! Not sound quality, and the ease in getting everything to look good.
The ONLY design that does not use global loop feedback, at least in one gain block, is the CTC Blowtorch, and I did it that way, as an experiment. A SUCCESSFUL experiment, by the way.
IF I could afford to not use feedback, I suspect that I could make even better sounding electronics, but alas, I cannot. This comes as a matter of experience, and trying both approaches, not some 'opinion'.
The ONLY design that does not use global loop feedback, at least in one gain block, is the CTC Blowtorch, and I did it that way, as an experiment. A SUCCESSFUL experiment, by the way.
IF I could afford to not use feedback, I suspect that I could make even better sounding electronics, but alas, I cannot. This comes as a matter of experience, and trying both approaches, not some 'opinion'.
I would like to point out that I was using 80-100dB of feedback in circuitry as far back as 1969, which would make Wavebourn about 12 years old, then. Later, I found problems with relying on negative feedback, and have striven to 'minimize' it, rather than 'maximize' it. It is a matter of opinion as to what is best to do, and I leave it to the general public to decide.
For example, Halcro made AMAZING specs with lots of feedback. However, their designs were costly, far more costly than Parasound, had limited current output, about 15A, as I remember, and they were fairly large and heavy, typical of other designs. That was their choice to do, and they got their fair attention in the audio marketplace.
What Wavebourn does, and how well, we may never know, because so far as I know, he has no audio product in the American marketplace. So let us keep our criticisms in perspective.
For example, Halcro made AMAZING specs with lots of feedback. However, their designs were costly, far more costly than Parasound, had limited current output, about 15A, as I remember, and they were fairly large and heavy, typical of other designs. That was their choice to do, and they got their fair attention in the audio marketplace.
What Wavebourn does, and how well, we may never know, because so far as I know, he has no audio product in the American marketplace. So let us keep our criticisms in perspective.
Thank you John. I hope I will have some audio products in the American marketplace, then you are very welcome to criticize.
1969 -- I think that was the year I was drafted into the Army. For some reason, I never found high gnfb necessary for low distortion in limited (one) production designs. Except for the phono stage.
BTW -- my 1985 article in TAA was a complimentary push-pull cascoded line stage where I said cascoding also reduced distortion caused by Miller effect. Got some flack for that but now i see that at least one other person thinks so as well. Thx - RNM
BTW -- my 1985 article in TAA was a complimentary push-pull cascoded line stage where I said cascoding also reduced distortion caused by Miller effect. Got some flack for that but now i see that at least one other person thinks so as well. Thx - RNM
Last edited:
In 1969 I was working at the Ampex Research Department on an advanced VCR. My primary job was servo control of the tape. However, I came up with a 'bright' idea that appeared to be, if practical, a breakthrough in analog recording. It used lots and lots of feedback, to even begin to work properly, but it would have reduced tape distortion significantly. I don't know if it would have worked, but with an IDEAL OP AMP, it had a very good chance of doing so. (I believed in idealistic op amps, back then) '-)
I thought Phil Spector and Joe Meek set the standard of no compression is too much.
How to produce an early 60's hit...
"Conspicuous in "Have I the Right?" is the prominent part of the drums that carry the song. Their effect was enhanced by making the members of the group stamp their feet on the wooden stairs to the studio. Meek recorded the sound with five microphones he had fixed to the banisters with bicycle clips. For the finishing touch someone beat a tambourine directly onto a microphone. The recording was somewhat sped up, reportedly to the singer’s (Dennis D'Ell) grief, who regretted that he could not reproduce this sound on stage."
Still available... http://www.joemeek.com/different.html A great read.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.