John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 3186 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th December 2012, 04:45 PM   #31851
RNMarsh is offline RNMarsh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
RNMarsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 2457 Cascade Trail; Cool, CA. 95614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esperado View Post
Like for cars batteries ? We have the - to the ground, un Europa. I don't know if any difference with corrosion.
Think 3-wire or balanced lines. As in - professional microphones?
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 04:48 PM   #31852
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Bootstrapping for lower dynamic input capacitance lowers the DISTORTION.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:13 PM   #31853
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Cooktown, Oz
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Well everyone, I hope I have given you enough to make my point. However, I am still missing (they are here somewhere) a complete set of noise measurements taken by B&K where they changed the microphone's R's to higher and higher values. It will come around sooner or later. I'll give you a sample, with 100G resistors.
JC, which B&K instrument is this ?

Is this a 2010? If so, what settings? It's obviously not the 1/3 8ve filter set
______________

Where did you get your 100G resistors in 1974? This would have been of considerable interest to me around that time.

What physical size roughly ?
______________

Err.rrh! What IS your point?

Last edited by kgrlee; 28th December 2012 at 07:28 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:25 PM   #31854
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Cooktown, Oz
Quote:
Originally Posted by fas42 View Post
Okay, on first dissection, the 192kHz version has some genuine ultrasonic in it but it falls below 40k frequency. All the material above this frequency is residual, borderline noise, nothing above -60dB down. It is barely possible to hear normal audio at this low level, so I think we can safely ignore it.
Does that mean there is no musical content above 40kHz? Even with DXD & DSD?

From Jurassic attempts to find vinyl with high slew rates and also some mike trials, the only musical signals above 20kHz would be cymbal crashes recorded close up.

Anyone know different and can show examples? IMHO, musical content needs to exhibit the characteristics of music. eg dynamic range; remember loud bits and soft bits ... unlike modern 21st century noise.

PMA, do you know if the vintage Telarc stuff issued shows dynamic range above 20kHz? From what I know about their mikes, it is possible.

Scott, excuse me if I exclude some of your exotic instruments from foreign lands. ... but if you can send a beach bum a recording or two, he might be persuaded that these are music.
________________________

Frank I think you were asking about detailed microphone distortion measurements over a large frequency range. I can say these are quite hard to do from experience circa 1980. The only published stuff I've seen is several Sennheiser AES papers where they show the THD advantage of their symmetrical RF mikes.

However, the 'conventional' evil examples in their paper are not really representative and it is trivial to have better performance. Their mikes are excellent but in fact suffer early overload for other reasons which might be more important to a recording engineer.

Last edited by kgrlee; 28th December 2012 at 07:44 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:26 PM   #31855
PMA is offline PMA  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
PMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Prague
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Bootstrapping for lower dynamic input capacitance lowers the DISTORTION.
Who cares?? SE tubes distort like a hell, and they are considered great sounding by many. Not me, thanks.
__________________
Pavel Macura
http://web.telecom.cz/macura/audiopage.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:32 PM   #31856
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgrlee View Post
JC, which B&K instrument is this ?

Is this a 2010? If so, what settings? It's obviously not the 1/3 8ve filter set
______________

Where did you get your 100G resistors in 1974? This would have been of considerable interest to me around that time.

What physical size roughly ?
______________

Err.rrh! What IS your point?
Glass resistors up to and maybe over 10^12 Ohms were readily available. They would have easily fit in a mic body.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.

Last edited by scott wurcer; 28th December 2012 at 07:34 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:33 PM   #31857
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by PMA View Post
Who cares?? SE tubes distort like a hell...
Other than output stages, nonsense.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:38 PM   #31858
bcarso is offline bcarso  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canoga Park, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
Other than output stages, nonsense.
Agree. Particularly to the extent that a triode follows the ideal Langmuir-Child characteristic, a very-lightly-loaded common-cathode- or common-anode-connected one has extraordinarily low distortion. Of course most triodes are not ideal, but many are very good within the middle range of biasing.

However PMA probably did mean SET power amps with significant plate loading.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:46 PM   #31859
PMA is offline PMA  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
PMA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Prague
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
Other than output stages, nonsense.
Especially output stages, but common cathode simple stages as well. It is very audible, but who cares?
__________________
Pavel Macura
http://web.telecom.cz/macura/audiopage.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2012, 07:48 PM   #31860
diyAudio Member
 
Kindhornman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
kgrlee,
I am not so convinced that there truly isn't any information above the 20Khz range as much as the present multi-microphone recording chain just can't get the phase response correct so that we can reproduce this information in any coherent way. If the phase response and timing was correct then we could talk about it, but that is the problem with most of what we are always talking about in upper frequency reproduction. I in-order to reproduce the sheen of a cymbal or overtones from other instruments we would have to get that correct or it is just smeared in the reproduction and then we just hear it as noise. Just my opinion of what is going on in the reproduction and recording chain.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2