John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 3305 - 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 20th January 2013, 01:24 AM   #33041
diyAudio Member
 
Esperado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: France
Fas42, it is a mix of two things. A degraded dynamic on the transients, due to magnetic tape losses with age, plus little details hidden by the distortions and noise of the vinyls and revealed by the 'no vinyl' digital copy (with no intention).

All that makes the song to sound far away from what the original producers *wanted*.
Even if we could find a perfect sample of the tapes as it was at this time, all those tunes would need a new *mix* to be adapted to the modern listening systems and audience actual taste.
Not only restoration.
A crime of lese-majesty that only the original artist would be allowed to do.
That you can try on your side and for yourself only, of course.

"real muso's doing their thing in the studio" do not exists. Every instrument is "produced", compressed or expanded, noise gated, equalized, with the add of artificial reverberations and effects like flanges, delays, vocoders, hamonizers etc. during the mixing session. Even live performances recorded on multi tracks.
And, if you believe sometimes in the magic of musicians just playing together (and in tune :-) in a real space, credit-it to the talent of sound engineers/producers.
__________________
Ultimate Protection and more.The Only Source of Knowledge is experience, everything else is just information” ©A. Einstein

Last edited by Esperado; 20th January 2013 at 01:42 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 01:30 AM   #33042
fas42 is offline fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 11
I can "see" a future where the real, raw takes of any musical performance are available for the consumer to reassemble as they wish. The producer becomes a thing of the past, so to speak.

So Adele: put together your pure, pristine, straight from the mic variation; or if a young kid you load it up with every spice and garnish, mangling "enhancement" available -- the consumer is in control ...

Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 01:49 AM   #33043
diyAudio Member
 
Esperado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: France
In a way, i would love to can remix according to my taste and actual ability some of my old work.
In an other way, the sound of a record is a part of the creation, and that's why it will never happen, i think. Plus the fact, that musicians or singers would not agree at all that people can hear some parts of the original takes, see what i mean ? :-)
__________________
Ultimate Protection and more.The Only Source of Knowledge is experience, everything else is just information” ©A. Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 02:41 AM   #33044
diyAudio Member
 
Kindhornman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
I agree Chriostophe that what the musicians and recording engineer put down should be considered a formal piece of music that only those people should be able to change.

Now that being said I have seen so many audio programs that will do just about anything you would want to do to a piece of music if that is what you truly want to do. Of course you are doing all of this in a digital format on a computer but so what. Last time I was in a studio everything was streaming over to the Apple computer running Pro Tools or whatever software. Your just talking about the same thing, but you are doing post production for your personal sound.

Go for it, I will just listen to the original and leave it to a little eq now and then. If I don't like that then I won't listen to an album that I just don't enjoy the mix. Just like in the days of vinyl there were albums that you just didn't like, take it for what it is worth, sometimes you just don't agree with the recording engineers mix or the sound that the artist was after for some personal reason. That is part of what makes the experience of music so individual, we all like something different.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 04:06 AM   #33045
1audio is offline 1audio  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
What I like best is the 1966 voltage regulators made by National. They were quieter than almost anything, today!
Must be out of this world, since National did not start making semiconductors until 1969.

LM723 is a neat device but it needs a lot of support compared to an LM317. They are still used in the linear power supply modules from Power One etc.
__________________
Demian Martin
Product Design Services
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 04:31 AM   #33046
bcarso is offline bcarso  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Canoga Park, California
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1audio View Post
LM723 is a neat device but it needs a lot of support compared to an LM317. They are still used in the linear power supply modules from Power One etc.
Amazing longevity. I used them back when they were Fairchild's uA723. Really not all that much to them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 05:57 AM   #33047
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oakmont PA
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1audio View Post
Must be out of this world, since National did not start making semiconductors until 1969.

LM723 is a neat device but it needs a lot of support compared to an LM317. They are still used in the linear power supply modules from Power One etc.
See, no noise at all!

I wonder how many process changes have been made to these golden oldies. The part number may be the same, but it reminds me of 2N3055.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 06:52 AM   #33048
diyAudio Member
 
sofaspud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: San Antonio
re: The Doors debut album
I'd guess Ray Manzarek played all the bass parts on his keyboard.
I recall that the original release was "flawed" because the tempo had been slowed down (accidently?), but remained the official release until the remasters of ~2009.
__________________
It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from enquiry. - Thomas Paine
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 08:08 AM   #33049
Bonsai is offline Bonsai  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
Bonsai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarso View Post
Amazing longevity. I used them back when they were Fairchild's uA723. Really not all that much to them.
It's the reference that is really quiet - about 7uV IIRC. And, you can decouple it easily so it really is low noise. The LM3xx are about 30uV/V of output, to a 15V output has nearly half a mV of noise.
__________________
bonsai
Amplifier Design and Construction for MUSIC! http://hifisonix.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2013, 10:01 AM   #33050
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post

PS Your first reference supports a .01F capacitor rising impedance as low as 3K! So does the 4th cite. The other two refer to filtering switching power supplies.
Irrelevant- what's the actual impedance? Sheesh. And the references don't actually say that, but don't let that get in the way.

Take a look at Fig 4.9 in Morgan Jones's book- he actually measured a cheap 10,000uF aluminum cap. The impedance at 6kHz was a whole 2 milliohms. Self resonance frequency is 15kHz, but the impedance at 100kHz is 8 milliohms. My bridge isn't quite as good as his, but I was able to confirm that the ESL of the cheap 10,000uF/35V (I didn't have any 25V units on hand) aluminum caps in my stock is about 10nH.

You indeed did the calculation, plugging in incorrect numbers and ignoring scaling factors. I went through that pretty thoroughly so that anyone could follow, not going to bother to do so again. There's a reason that 797 based preamps are dead quiet. Even if you dispute the widely-known-accurate PSUD2 sim, you're taking the difference between -250dB and -244dB noise. Seriously?

The rodeo clown act for John's benefit gets old. His claims are still false no matter how much dust you try to kick up.

edit: Here's my "work" to show the actual ripple. Plugging in values for components I had on hand, I find that my 120mV estimate was indeed too high- it's ~70mV p-p. Makes the concern even more ridiculous. PSUD2 is a "known-good" sim- I'm not a big believer in sim software, but again and again, it's given me (and thousands of other users) accurate results.
Attached Images
File Type: png Sim for Ed.png (48.6 KB, 130 views)
__________________
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

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 06:45 PM.


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