Lowering the volume is shifting the average. If you wanna hear on a higher average so the lowest levels are more easy to pick up then you can't fit the peaks if you can't hit over zero for enough times. When you got a wide dynamic range to record, the ear loses a lot of detail if your lower parts are weaker in average level. Its either you listen in a quieter environment or you compress your peaks, not strictly needed, but practically desired by the industry. Thus uncompressed CD and MP3 are better on headphones. Check out the vinyl LP. Your phono stage may well be 250-300mV RMS, say 60dB gain on a low MC, and plays your average LP at same volume knob position more or less as your 2VRMS CDP. Because you can find up to +16dB modulated transient cuts on grooves, especially on 45RPM maxi singles or special audiophile cuts. So they cut it nearer to 0dB average. OTOH they shorten the envelope to squeeze it higher on CD so its perceived as loud enough in pop. The 'loudness wars' is a well known term in the industry. So there you are. You got your fine high dynamic range digital recording gear and you end up compressing it more than in the past that you had to smother the surface noise of tape and vinyl and you kept it higher since it could take the odd peak without hard clip. Especially in the highs when it crashes it is very annoying. The thing that a recent production record sounds peculiarly better than the CD that comes from the same digital master is partly it's cut on higher average, part that the processing is not continued in the replay chain. Your digital master goes to the lathe, engraves, then you don't get a replay machine synthesizing it again from a code as with the CD copy. In the vinyl version you will lose some yet you will not have it re made from ground up by a real time computer that the CDP is.
IMHO of course, it may just be only a matter of lowering the volume.🙂
Alaska was Russia wasn't it? I hope they did not change the decoration after they purchased it from Alexander II.😀
End of OT on my part. And to come to the thread's question, best tubes are Russian special models. Here you are.🙂
Sounds not patriotic, but I would prefer some German tubes. Like, LS-50 over GU-50. I hundred percent believe that all of them would be like twin sisters, so I would save on trimpots and coupling caps for biasing them, especially when paralleling.
About Alaska... I've never been there, or on the far north-east of Siberia, but I don't expect there Taiga like in Eastern Siberia I grew up. When I read your post about Taiga, I heard winds on top of the giant trees, and echo from woodpeckers' activity around... Bears, birds, mosquitoes... Ohhh, mosquitoes! 🙁
No, it's better to record something local, like creek, ocean, waterfall... 🙂
Here is what I recorded when tried to capture the rain. I use it to try equipment before concerts, sometimes. 😉
http://wavebourn.com/rain_helicopter.mp3
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I believe the whole of the great north is like this - it circles the earth. Parts of it are called Siberia, parts are called Canada and other parts have other names.
I enjoy canoeing in Algonquin Park, in Ontario. It's really not very far north, but you have everything you described, tall trees, woodpeckers, bears, birds and oh yes, mosquitos - but it is absolutely beautiful.
sorry, couldn't resist joining the 'off topic', brought back pleasant memories for me too.
Very real clip. Nice.
Really good German models are great too I agree. I liked 6H8C black anode metal base Melz in a line stage a lot too. It sounded much better than any original 6SN7 to me. The good thing is that they made sturdy copies of Euro & Western tubes in USSR that we can still find.
P.S. Is that a good copy?
Attachments
Hello,
While this thread is drifting about let me ask this. Assume the recording is optimized and the playback amplifiers are optimized, I now want to take off the headphones and listen near field what are the steps towards optimized near field? Think depth, sound stage and placement of instruments and bears and woodpeckers and babbling brooks and the like?
DT
All Just For Fun!
While this thread is drifting about let me ask this. Assume the recording is optimized and the playback amplifiers are optimized, I now want to take off the headphones and listen near field what are the steps towards optimized near field? Think depth, sound stage and placement of instruments and bears and woodpeckers and babbling brooks and the like?
DT
All Just For Fun!
Arm's length distance to well toed in near field monitors in a very well reflection damped production suite.
Hello,
Near field speakers do not need high power output. I am considering Linkwitz style dipoles using a pair of 7-inch Vifa PL18WO09’s (plus tweeters) that were on sale at partsexpress. Thoughts?
DT
All Just For Fun!
Near field speakers do not need high power output. I am considering Linkwitz style dipoles using a pair of 7-inch Vifa PL18WO09’s (plus tweeters) that were on sale at partsexpress. Thoughts?
DT
All Just For Fun!
I would answer my thoughts but it will trigger much OT. I suggest you start a thread in the loudspeakers forum, there some are much learned about wave launch, dispersion control, room interactions, so to suggest you the best approach for near field monitoring in your particular room and power abilities.
Very good, but inconsistent, like all Russian tubes. Germans are the strictest to specs, as I know.
I would not expect from Russian tubes good consistency, unless they were stamped by Defense Ministry QA (star or rhombus), and come from the same box.
American RCA tubes from 1940'th I used to have were extremely close to each other.
The ECC802S is a very good tube. I have some Telefunken left and use them in my Poweramp. The Aikido buffer i posted can be made with it too. I think JJ is now rebuilding them but i do not have experience with those.
Hi,
Rombus or not QA was pretty much inexistant in those days, not even from the same box bred next to that other tube.
Cheers, 😉
Rombus or not QA was pretty much inexistant in those days, not even from the same box bred next to that other tube.
Cheers, 😉
In California? Hmmm... I'm not sure about that. But sub-alpine forest for sure. I'm not sure where to find the muskegs...
I know where to find quite a bit of really boggy, taiga-like terrain in NY State (believe it or not!). Spruce/fir peatlands and decent-sized boreal bogs, the whole 'sprooce-moose' enchilada.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
Sproocie-moosie where I lived in Alaska, but the trees are tiny there.
Where I live now in Humboldt Co we have plenty of tall trees and the crazy wind in winter, so I should be able to get some recordings next winter for your nature sounds dither. Sounds like a cool idea!
Right now is only the buzzing of bees and the occasional beating of birds wings overhead. At night there are frogs and owls. 😀
Hi,
Just a thought regards the heater having to be floated on the HT supply rail when I only want to bring DC into the line stage from an existing circuit!
So I am going to try a DC to DC converter that has 1.6KV DC isolation to supply the SRPP ECC88 heaters and float them using HT connected to DC converter output! Should be interesting!
Regards
M. Gregg
Just a thought regards the heater having to be floated on the HT supply rail when I only want to bring DC into the line stage from an existing circuit!
So I am going to try a DC to DC converter that has 1.6KV DC isolation to supply the SRPP ECC88 heaters and float them using HT connected to DC converter output! Should be interesting!
Regards
M. Gregg
Make sure you're not getting far more noise from the DC/DC box than you want. I've yet to find a quiet one, and most of the noise is highish F and spiky, so hard to ignore.
Regards, Allen
Regards, Allen
- Status
- Not open for further replies.