After considering your earlier post, it may be too much data to keep track of / make edits within the OP, or include graphs and other information.
Maybe we can add to a collaborative folder as we make progress in the thread to keep everything in one place for easiest review? Also this way everyone can contribute freely.
This could be the happy medium I think.
We could add the link to the OP as well.
Test LP - Google Drive
I threw in a track list as filler that I pulled from the thread but not sure if it's the definitive one.
The file structure is:
Folder for artwork
Folder for graphs to include in docs.
Spreadsheet for Tracklist
Spreadsheet for distribution
Document for documentation (back cover)
Document for documentation (expanded)
Pressing info (Requirements, quotes, inquiries, etc.)
It is shared to and editable by all. If we wind up using this please be considerate of others work and do not write over it unless it's agreed upon within the thread.
Thoughts? Anything I missed?
Maybe we can add to a collaborative folder as we make progress in the thread to keep everything in one place for easiest review? Also this way everyone can contribute freely.
This could be the happy medium I think.
We could add the link to the OP as well.
Test LP - Google Drive
I threw in a track list as filler that I pulled from the thread but not sure if it's the definitive one.
The file structure is:
Folder for artwork
Folder for graphs to include in docs.
Spreadsheet for Tracklist
Spreadsheet for distribution
Document for documentation (back cover)
Document for documentation (expanded)
Pressing info (Requirements, quotes, inquiries, etc.)
It is shared to and editable by all. If we wind up using this please be considerate of others work and do not write over it unless it's agreed upon within the thread.
Thoughts? Anything I missed?
Last edited:
Is there agreement more or less? Anything that is particularly troublesome to get consensus on?
My feeling is that if we focus on ironing out the areas where there’s still discussion to be had, the remainder can be assumed good to go.
Once a complete list is hashed out and if we have spare time per side we could consider inclusion of useful bonus materials.
Is there any utility in exploring using locked grooves? Has this topic been brought up yet? I think it could provide extra convenience for taking measurements. One could just wait for the track to restart rather than precisely time it through the end of the previous track.
My feeling is that if we focus on ironing out the areas where there’s still discussion to be had, the remainder can be assumed good to go.
Once a complete list is hashed out and if we have spare time per side we could consider inclusion of useful bonus materials.
Is there any utility in exploring using locked grooves? Has this topic been brought up yet? I think it could provide extra convenience for taking measurements. One could just wait for the track to restart rather than precisely time it through the end of the previous track.
Locked grooves have been mentioned for wear testing. The signal those grooves would contain has not been mentioned - or maybe I don't remember. There is an extra charge for locked grooves, but we don't know the cost yet. I doubt it will add more than a few cents to the LP.
We will most likely go with Lucky's list, with a few modifications or additions. It may not be possible to get a clean or flat cut up to 50K. GZ said that they have cut up to 30K, so we know we can get that. We will ask if they did that with reduced speed mastering. TBD. They have suggested 2/3 speed for a good compromise between high and low ends of the spectrum.
I can generate any of the test signals needed, except the special triangles wanted by Lucky. He will have to calculate or generate those himself. It's also best if Lucky writes the documentation and analysis of those files. After generation I'll put the test signals into the Google Docs folder for others to inspect and double check.
Who is brave enough to take on the documentation of the other test signals?
We will most likely go with Lucky's list, with a few modifications or additions. It may not be possible to get a clean or flat cut up to 50K. GZ said that they have cut up to 30K, so we know we can get that. We will ask if they did that with reduced speed mastering. TBD. They have suggested 2/3 speed for a good compromise between high and low ends of the spectrum.
I can generate any of the test signals needed, except the special triangles wanted by Lucky. He will have to calculate or generate those himself. It's also best if Lucky writes the documentation and analysis of those files. After generation I'll put the test signals into the Google Docs folder for others to inspect and double check.
Who is brave enough to take on the documentation of the other test signals?
After generation I'll put the test signals into the Google Docs folder for others to inspect and double check.
Who is brave enough to take on the documentation of the other test signals?
I’ll nest a separate folder for the test signals in the drive folder to keep organized.
I have the bravery, but lack competence in the subject matter ;-) there’s others out there far more qualified than I. Hopefully they have the time to contribute.
I am however happy to proof and handle grammatical issues.
Nice Photo Pyramid and thanks for taking the time.
Regarding stock photos: you are looking at min. $300-400 yearly license per photo to sell a product which contains it.
For example, this is $395/yr. :
If you think that's bad... well, don't even get me going down that road.
Anyhow, these companies base their fee structure on use case, sometimes size, etc. and often it needs to be renewed yearly.
Also you aren't dealing with original photographers, but 3rd parties who own rights to represent them. If we aren't 501c3 and it's a product that's being sold, we are SOL. And they are aggressive about protecting their assets... legal action is not uncommon. This is not a road you want to go down for a community driven product. Much wiser to create original content.
It wasn't a personal thing against the concept to suggest to avoid this- I'm happy to provide my time pro bono creating original content which doesn't have these fees and which meets the desires of the community.
The pool of talent in this thread is extremely gifted in a wide range of areas, and I imagine many of those contributing here may have professional hourly rates which would put a project like this out of reach if it wasn't for their generosity.
So, understanding this, why not take maximum advantage of what we are already afforded and drive costs down for everyone's benefit?
This is "DIY" after all. Not "Buy Someone Else's Stuff"
Last edited:
I took a look at the track list and it looks like we are running a little long. Currently at about 45 mins total. While we might squeeze that on, it wouldn't be great for a high quality master. 18 mins per side would make for a better cut.
I also split the list up into 2 sides, and tried to put the tracks in a more appropriate order. But as I repeated a few, my 2 sided LP is even longer.
Please see Tracklist 2 sides on the Google Drive.
Test LP - Google Drive
I also split the list up into 2 sides, and tried to put the tracks in a more appropriate order. But as I repeated a few, my 2 sided LP is even longer.
Please see Tracklist 2 sides on the Google Drive.
Test LP - Google Drive
I've created most of the test signals as 96K sample rate in 32 bit float. The tones, the sweeps, the bursts. From there it's easy for me to set whatever levels are needed and then save as 24 bit signed stereo files. I can easily put whatever fade in and fade out is needed, and add a silence at the end of each (1s, 2s whatever) as the track transition. That can be done in batch mode.
I've noticed that currently the highest track level is 12dB above reference 5 cm/s. Is this the most we want? Some test LPs go to +18dB. We could do that, or +16 as our maximum.
I've noticed that currently the highest track level is 12dB above reference 5 cm/s. Is this the most we want? Some test LPs go to +18dB. We could do that, or +16 as our maximum.
I will contact forum member vencel who has taken some nice macro photos from cartridges. There shouldn't appear any specific brands on photos IMHO.
I've uploaded 21 example test files into the Test Signals folder of Google Drive
Test LP - Google Drive
These should all be 96/24 two channel FLAC files.
The reference of 0dB @ 5 cm/s is placed 12dB below maximum digital volume. Thus a signal at +12dB would be at maximum digital volume, its peaks at full scale. Everything is referenced to those levels. We would let the mastering plant know which track equals 5 cm/s and all else should fall into place.
Have a listen and a look for yourself, please tell me of any errors you see. Not all the test signals are there, just a representation. On the track list some tracks are labeled mono, L+R, L-R, Vertical or Lateral. I took Mono, L+R and a lateral to be the same, with L-R and Vertical being the right channel reversed polarity from the left channel. Is this correct?
Test LP - Google Drive
These should all be 96/24 two channel FLAC files.
The reference of 0dB @ 5 cm/s is placed 12dB below maximum digital volume. Thus a signal at +12dB would be at maximum digital volume, its peaks at full scale. Everything is referenced to those levels. We would let the mastering plant know which track equals 5 cm/s and all else should fall into place.
Have a listen and a look for yourself, please tell me of any errors you see. Not all the test signals are there, just a representation. On the track list some tracks are labeled mono, L+R, L-R, Vertical or Lateral. I took Mono, L+R and a lateral to be the same, with L-R and Vertical being the right channel reversed polarity from the left channel. Is this correct?
Legal considerations
I had some hard questions over the festive period as to legal and financial matters for this project, which I think might be quite serious problems not necessarily yet thought through.
Maybe this sort of thing has cropped up before, so perhaps you moderator chaps can help provide answers before we get to a sticky position (mess) by accident?
Who would be the legal owner of the product, ie own the title along with its rights and liabilities ? Is it an individual, and if so whom, or is it a legal entity formed wittingly or unwittingly by those involved ?
Such things as rights and liabilities might follow I suppose. Such as who would be liable for any 'public' claims for damage arising from its use? Such as claims for damage to equipment, or I suppose personal harm to hearing from misuse, or the million other such things. No matter how ridiculous, such things arise.
Trouble is, I think, this seems awfully like a commercial product now, rather than a sketch or idea we shared between us as DIY enthusiasts. I mean as it stands, it's proposed to look and perform like a commercial product, has a price and a sales channel and peeps lining up ready to buy..........
And what happens to profit/loss from its sales ? What if it's very successful ? Or very unsuccessful? Who has the financial interest ? How is it funded?
And what if we accidentally infringe copyright or other commercial IP ? Who underwrites or insures against such things?
Awkward questions, but I'd need satisfactory answers before I could consider being any part of it, or permitting use of my original stuff in it I think.......
LD
I had some hard questions over the festive period as to legal and financial matters for this project, which I think might be quite serious problems not necessarily yet thought through.
Maybe this sort of thing has cropped up before, so perhaps you moderator chaps can help provide answers before we get to a sticky position (mess) by accident?
Who would be the legal owner of the product, ie own the title along with its rights and liabilities ? Is it an individual, and if so whom, or is it a legal entity formed wittingly or unwittingly by those involved ?
Such things as rights and liabilities might follow I suppose. Such as who would be liable for any 'public' claims for damage arising from its use? Such as claims for damage to equipment, or I suppose personal harm to hearing from misuse, or the million other such things. No matter how ridiculous, such things arise.
Trouble is, I think, this seems awfully like a commercial product now, rather than a sketch or idea we shared between us as DIY enthusiasts. I mean as it stands, it's proposed to look and perform like a commercial product, has a price and a sales channel and peeps lining up ready to buy..........
And what happens to profit/loss from its sales ? What if it's very successful ? Or very unsuccessful? Who has the financial interest ? How is it funded?
And what if we accidentally infringe copyright or other commercial IP ? Who underwrites or insures against such things?
Awkward questions, but I'd need satisfactory answers before I could consider being any part of it, or permitting use of my original stuff in it I think.......
LD
Last edited:
Lucky:
Those are sensible questions to ask, but I do not believe they are insurmountable. We could start by including some boiler-plate along the lines of the GNU Public License. It has a very good disclaimer which (cite needed) I think has been tested in court. It also confers rights on others; it basically says "this is yours to use and modify, but if you distribute it, with or without your modifications, it must be under the same license". That still begs the question of the assignee of copyright.
Is this really a commercial product? Consider the typical group-buy around here, where someone proposed a circuit idea, it is prototyped and modified by others, and finally someone, with permission of the original designer, sets up a group buy based on the current version if the circuit, as laid out by some member and possibly modified by others. A BOM is supplied, and sometimes partial kits of critical components. I am not aware of any legal issues surrounding such group buys of printed circuit boards, which I think have the potential for far worse liability issues than a test record.
I guess another question is whether your reticence is related to liability, or more to do with releasing your IP in a way which you do not control. I certainly understand if that is the case, though I would encourage you to contribute to a community project like this.
Those are sensible questions to ask, but I do not believe they are insurmountable. We could start by including some boiler-plate along the lines of the GNU Public License. It has a very good disclaimer which (cite needed) I think has been tested in court. It also confers rights on others; it basically says "this is yours to use and modify, but if you distribute it, with or without your modifications, it must be under the same license". That still begs the question of the assignee of copyright.
Is this really a commercial product? Consider the typical group-buy around here, where someone proposed a circuit idea, it is prototyped and modified by others, and finally someone, with permission of the original designer, sets up a group buy based on the current version if the circuit, as laid out by some member and possibly modified by others. A BOM is supplied, and sometimes partial kits of critical components. I am not aware of any legal issues surrounding such group buys of printed circuit boards, which I think have the potential for far worse liability issues than a test record.
I guess another question is whether your reticence is related to liability, or more to do with releasing your IP in a way which you do not control. I certainly understand if that is the case, though I would encourage you to contribute to a community project like this.
I believe it would be no different than a circuit board being sold on the diyaudio store or through various members.
The exact details would be best sourced from moderators / forum owner.
Who would be liable if someone is electrocuted? Liability disclaimers are not new.
As far as copyright infringement, I believe that we are dealing with sufficiently archaic technology to avoid most if not all patent related issues.
The group buy format is proven and is used daily here with great results.
I don’t see much difference between a circuit board and an LP, in terms of risk exposure.
Also, we have no real tally of actual interest. My feeling is it will be much more moderate than we presently assume.
I’ll add an interest check / signup spreadsheet to the Test LP drive folder in which interested parties can sign up and indicate how many units they’d like.
Perhaps a lawyer in our midst could chime in with more reliable information.
The exact details would be best sourced from moderators / forum owner.
Who would be liable if someone is electrocuted? Liability disclaimers are not new.
As far as copyright infringement, I believe that we are dealing with sufficiently archaic technology to avoid most if not all patent related issues.
The group buy format is proven and is used daily here with great results.
I don’t see much difference between a circuit board and an LP, in terms of risk exposure.
Also, we have no real tally of actual interest. My feeling is it will be much more moderate than we presently assume.
I’ll add an interest check / signup spreadsheet to the Test LP drive folder in which interested parties can sign up and indicate how many units they’d like.
Perhaps a lawyer in our midst could chime in with more reliable information.
I don't see it looking like a commercial product. It's just like any group buy on here. The only time this changes is if I have missed some discussion about continuing sales AFTER the initial run. But if these are done as a GB by members for members at cost each time then there is no issue.
Liability is an interesting one and needs someone versed in the art to comment whether a large disclaimer is enough. Providing no one is profiting I can't see anyone would bother to pursue an IP claim but stranger things have happened.
EDIT: I see other responses got in whilst I was typing
Liability is an interesting one and needs someone versed in the art to comment whether a large disclaimer is enough. Providing no one is profiting I can't see anyone would bother to pursue an IP claim but stranger things have happened.
EDIT: I see other responses got in whilst I was typing
The issue re: sales I believe is units... usually pricing is roughly per thousand, or 500 / 1,000, / 2,500 / 10,000. Not like a PCB where we can purchase 383 on the button if we wanted.
We will likely have some extras, which we could provide to the diyaudio store- they could enlist themselves as a group buy member like anyone else, and maybe add a few bucks to cover their eCommerce fees and so forth.
I've added a tentative sign-up form here.
It's inside the Test LP folder which is also shared with everyone.
OP, could you add these links to the first post?
We will likely have some extras, which we could provide to the diyaudio store- they could enlist themselves as a group buy member like anyone else, and maybe add a few bucks to cover their eCommerce fees and so forth.
I've added a tentative sign-up form here.
It's inside the Test LP folder which is also shared with everyone.
OP, could you add these links to the first post?
I don't know about liability, but agree with others that it's no different than the PCB group buys.
Costs are low if we go thru CZ Vinyl in the Czech Republic and deliver to Germany. About 4.5 Euros each for a run of 275 LPs. Overhead will double that with margin losses and returns, credit card or PayPaly fees, mailing boxes, shipping to North America and Hong Kong. About $10 or 9 € should cover it. A 50% deposit is required to start the process.
As for copyright, who cares? Are any of us going to claim copyright on a group project organized on the forum? We have also been careful to steer clear of patent and copyright of any signals used. If anyone see a conflict with IP, please let us know.
Who will finance it? Good question. I have no idea if we will get enough orders up front to completely fund the thing before we put in an order. We need only 50% to get the ball rolling, so that's possible. A few people have mentioned their willingness to help with financing. It isn't a huge sum, but we don't want anyone stuck with the fees and no LP.
Costs are low if we go thru CZ Vinyl in the Czech Republic and deliver to Germany. About 4.5 Euros each for a run of 275 LPs. Overhead will double that with margin losses and returns, credit card or PayPaly fees, mailing boxes, shipping to North America and Hong Kong. About $10 or 9 € should cover it. A 50% deposit is required to start the process.
As for copyright, who cares? Are any of us going to claim copyright on a group project organized on the forum? We have also been careful to steer clear of patent and copyright of any signals used. If anyone see a conflict with IP, please let us know.
Who will finance it? Good question. I have no idea if we will get enough orders up front to completely fund the thing before we put in an order. We need only 50% to get the ball rolling, so that's possible. A few people have mentioned their willingness to help with financing. It isn't a huge sum, but we don't want anyone stuck with the fees and no LP.
I think the interesting difference between an LP and a schematic is that you can use a schematic to make your own breadboard version for personal use.
With an LP, not so much.
It might be worth considering to devise an agreed upon method to keep some availability for stragglers and late comers.
With an LP, not so much.
It might be worth considering to devise an agreed upon method to keep some availability for stragglers and late comers.
Last edited: