Finally got a sec amidst the holiday whirlwind... here Pano as promised, v1.
Where are things presently? It's been a while since I've scanned the thread.
As far as the cover I took liberties with wording just to get something moving... just a first stab.
Thoughts re: title and tagline?
For the back presumably there'd be:
Tracklist and extended track info
Thank you / call out to particularly helpful folks
Maybe a little blurb about how it came to be / what the goals were
I've also seen walkthroughs / procedural info sometimes on the back cover and sometimes on the insert. I think the back cover would be most useful.. I always wind up misplacing or damaging inserts or sometimes they go undiscovered entirely. If back cover is the consensus that will be a lot of text to jam on there.
If someone could assist in getting to me just some tentative information so that I can get a feel for the layout it would be appreciated. I am assuming we are still a ways out but it's nice to make progress where you can.
hi space, did you use by chance the templates provided for the cover and label by GZ Vinyl, available onbtheir website? just in case we use them it would make things easier....
i like it!
Hesener,
No I did not but will of course use them to send to their printers. Print layout will not be a problem. I’ll take a look at the GZ files. I did not know this was the final plant choice.
Before finals are packaged for the printers I will print them myself and assemble actual-size proofs using the GZ templates to review and confirm there are no issues.
What you see is known as a mock-up, which is a draft of sorts that is meant to give a more lifelike, finished appearance.
John
No I did not but will of course use them to send to their printers. Print layout will not be a problem. I’ll take a look at the GZ files. I did not know this was the final plant choice.
Before finals are packaged for the printers I will print them myself and assemble actual-size proofs using the GZ templates to review and confirm there are no issues.
What you see is known as a mock-up, which is a draft of sorts that is meant to give a more lifelike, finished appearance.
John
Yes, from F = BlI law and with mechanical impedance provided by mass, very much like speakers. Indeed, from the look of it, the drivers are much like voice coils.
However, this example is beyond extreme because high accelerations involved, ~4800G, are so big they couldn't persist for long enough to be meaningful: velocity gets too big and groove curvature is too small to be realistic.
Rather, this probably involved a problem similar to speakers, where energy stored in moving mass can reduce impedance of voice coil to the point where current flow can become damaging.
So was invented the 'acceleration limiter', which effectively limits current and so protects cutter head coils from heat damage.
I spent quite some time previously looking at real accelerations arising in programme material, and concluded it doesn't often exceed 600G in practice for real content. This is well below the threshold of acceleration limiters, as I understand it.
Point is we shouldn't rely on acceleration limiters to define our curvatures. It's manageable from programme source material. And an upper limit of about 1000G for the acceleration test tracks should be just trackable without stressing cutter heads.
It's good about the cover artwork generator SW - my vote would be for something on the front that wasn't a Bohr model of an atom, known to be wrong and outdated. Or maybe that's a metaphor for understanding of vinyl playback in general, a twist of irony..........................
And yes, we need an insert with good descriptions and theory behind the tracks and how to use them. Not unlike the STR112, but updated.
Have a great holiday period, peeps !
LD
Pano,
Thanks for the photo and the measurements. It answers my question. I maybe should have used the term ‘tracking’ distortion instead of ‘tracing’ distortion. Here is what I was trying to visualize:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=652806&stc=1&d=1514130804
I scaled the 20mm dimension to estimate that the stylus to pivot length of the cutter looks to be about 11mm. As a comparison I measured the stylus shaft on an AT 150MLX and a Shure M97xE, and found them both to be about 6mm. For minimum distortion not only would the playback VTA have to be correct, but ideally the length of the playback stylus shaft would be the same as the length of the cutter stylus shaft. Typical playback stylus shaft lengths being what they are, it seems that there will remain some amount of irreducible distortion, even under ideal conditions. It would be worthwhile to include detailed cutterhead information with the test disk, in case some current or future test method were able to resolve distortion components attributable to stylus shaft length mismatch.
Ray K
Attachments
It's good about the cover artwork generator SW - my vote would be for something on the front that wasn't a Bohr model of an atom, known to be wrong and outdated. Or maybe that's a metaphor for understanding of vinyl playback in general, a twist of irony..........................
Since much of the discussion about the test LP has to do with groove geometry, why not have a cover that reflects that effort?
There are quite a number of images available that might be more apropos....
Attachments
Are these images in the public domain? Do we know their creator and they’ve provided written consent?
We can’t just swipe photos off the internet...
Anyone who has taken photos like this (or other photos that closely reflect the themes and goals of the LP) and would like to offer them for possible use please PM me. I’ll provide my email address for high resolution copies.
The atomic theme was taken from an old test LP I happened to have on hand. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.
We can’t just swipe photos off the internet...
Anyone who has taken photos like this (or other photos that closely reflect the themes and goals of the LP) and would like to offer them for possible use please PM me. I’ll provide my email address for high resolution copies.
The atomic theme was taken from an old test LP I happened to have on hand. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.
PS: for those involved in writing the documentation:
Using the cover below as an example, with ample space for graphs you should have legible space on the back cover for roughly:
1,200 words
6,400 characters
28 paragraphs
162 lines
In researching other test discs I noticed STR-112 also has an insert / sheet with further info. Does anyone have this record with the insert who can take some photos of the layout and contents and send to me? They have done a great job in cramming a lot of useful technical information in a small area. I think it would be wise to try and follow their lead.
Also they saved a lot of space by putting the track list info on the LP. I think that would be good to consider.
I'm going to try and keep my head down before something is approaching a real proof to avoid a surge of feedback re: artwork. Not that I'm not open to those very things, but I think it is a bit premature at this stage. Better to wait until I have more information and content to work with as this frequently dictates design changes that are not known at the outset. Was just throwing some ideas around here to signal you can count me in to knock out the final.
Using the cover below as an example, with ample space for graphs you should have legible space on the back cover for roughly:
1,200 words
6,400 characters
28 paragraphs
162 lines
In researching other test discs I noticed STR-112 also has an insert / sheet with further info. Does anyone have this record with the insert who can take some photos of the layout and contents and send to me? They have done a great job in cramming a lot of useful technical information in a small area. I think it would be wise to try and follow their lead.
Also they saved a lot of space by putting the track list info on the LP. I think that would be good to consider.
I'm going to try and keep my head down before something is approaching a real proof to avoid a surge of feedback re: artwork. Not that I'm not open to those very things, but I think it is a bit premature at this stage. Better to wait until I have more information and content to work with as this frequently dictates design changes that are not known at the outset. Was just throwing some ideas around here to signal you can count me in to knock out the final.
Last edited:
Hi spaceistheplace,
I have taken a few pictures of my setup playing an LP from different angles at high resolution that you're welcome to use. Not as dramatic of those that were posted, but the reflection of the cartridge in the record is cool. I think these are 10 MEG files. Let's see if I can resize a few and post them ...
Hopefully you now can see some thumbnails at 1024 x 768. If you are interested, I can send you the full size file at 4.25 MB each.
Merry Christmas!
-Chris
I have taken a few pictures of my setup playing an LP from different angles at high resolution that you're welcome to use. Not as dramatic of those that were posted, but the reflection of the cartridge in the record is cool. I think these are 10 MEG files. Let's see if I can resize a few and post them ...
Hopefully you now can see some thumbnails at 1024 x 768. If you are interested, I can send you the full size file at 4.25 MB each.
Merry Christmas!
-Chris
Attachments
Working groups?
Would it be a good idea to form separate working groups? Like:
A) defining final track list, actual content, position, length, level and other parameters of each track
B) creating the digital representation of tracks
C) keeping contact and negotiating technical and logistic details with the recording company
D) creating the insert sheet or back cover text (technical description of tracks and their intended use, measuring methods, etc.)
E) creating cover artwork
F) managing ordering, purchase and delivery from the recording company to individual buyers
- AOB
All the above should be in the accepted format of the recording company of choose. Our goal were to populate each WGs, and then each WGs should have their task completed. Could we also set a timeframe? Please comment.
Would it be a good idea to form separate working groups? Like:
A) defining final track list, actual content, position, length, level and other parameters of each track
B) creating the digital representation of tracks
C) keeping contact and negotiating technical and logistic details with the recording company
D) creating the insert sheet or back cover text (technical description of tracks and their intended use, measuring methods, etc.)
E) creating cover artwork
F) managing ordering, purchase and delivery from the recording company to individual buyers
- AOB
All the above should be in the accepted format of the recording company of choose. Our goal were to populate each WGs, and then each WGs should have their task completed. Could we also set a timeframe? Please comment.
That’s sensible, but may remove a lot of conversation from the thread and prevent some useful dialogue. I think that without this spirit of sharing and transparency the project may have never gotten off the ground to begin with.
Either way I think it would be helpful, since you are the OP, to update the first post as to progress in these various areas and what is finalized. You can date the changes so everyone sees the timeline and no one is in the dark if they miss a few pages of the thread. This is common from what I see in other threads.
Since the process is linear it would be sensible to approach one line item at a time to keep the conversation on track and ensure forward motion. Requesting that discussion stay on topic before moving to the next line item will assist in keeping the ball rolling.
I’m under the assumption that presently no aspects have been finalized?
Is there enough consensus / general familiarity with objectives that we can begin to check some of this off?
Either way I think it would be helpful, since you are the OP, to update the first post as to progress in these various areas and what is finalized. You can date the changes so everyone sees the timeline and no one is in the dark if they miss a few pages of the thread. This is common from what I see in other threads.
Since the process is linear it would be sensible to approach one line item at a time to keep the conversation on track and ensure forward motion. Requesting that discussion stay on topic before moving to the next line item will assist in keeping the ball rolling.
I’m under the assumption that presently no aspects have been finalized?
Is there enough consensus / general familiarity with objectives that we can begin to check some of this off?
PS
I say this as someone much more comfortable using workgroup software like Asana or comparable.
To me, while the forum/thread structure is not ideal, to break down into too many disparate workgroups removes the public and community spirit which I feel is integral.
Also, it leaves a permanent, public web document of the process for the curious minds of the future.
I say this as someone much more comfortable using workgroup software like Asana or comparable.
To me, while the forum/thread structure is not ideal, to break down into too many disparate workgroups removes the public and community spirit which I feel is integral.
Also, it leaves a permanent, public web document of the process for the curious minds of the future.