As a suggestion, there is no signal better as the real one.
Recordings from a number of different Pick Up systems would be better than any other synthetic signal.
Maybe some people in your neighbourhood or readers of this thread are able to make recordings of their gear.
Hans
sir,
absolute newbie here so pardon me if I am understanding it wrong. Wouldn't warp be different for different records ?
Regards
Almost all ????
Audio Precision, Prism and Agilent to name a few, are all able to display white noise flat, although the frequency scale might be linear or logarithmic.
And PC based products like Arta, Pico, Rightmark etc. do also the same.
So I don't get your point.
Hans
According to p135 of my Audio Precision 2700-series user manual:
"The selected channel is passed through a 4-pole 1/3-octave tunable bandpass filter before its amplitude is measured..."
Things may very well be different if you working in the digital FFT domain.
I know nothing about Prism and Agilent.
Yes indeed. Happ & Karlov give maximum levels derived from many samples.
It's not ideal- much more detail statistics would be very desirable- but it's a starting point.
Regarding the context of point 3)
I think it might be helpful to give a little "rememberall" ( Harry Potter)
L. Happ, and F. Karlov, Record Warps and System Playback Performance, Preprint 926 (D-5 ), presented at the 46th Convention of the Audio Engineering Society, New York, 1973
I found at least one link of interst that might give more understanding what problem L'Happ and F. Karlov were refering to
High Fidelity Phonograph Cartridge - Technical Seminar | Shure Technical FAQ
My point is, that I am questioning the use of their nominal values from 1973' tonarm/cartridge research database and in consequence the "weighing" of their parameters and deducting the weighing from these parameters for the "Vinyliser" Project.
( please excuse my grammar - english is not an easy language for me and I hope my point comes accross )
The Tonearm/cartridges on the market in 1973 and before had a common "signature" or at least a messured statistical behaviour, that led to the description L.Happ and F. Karlov could base their warp spectrum upon.
My question is - would a sweep through today's tonarm/cartridge combinations in 2016 still show the same nominal values ( ) with todays cartridges, tonearm builts that are around compared to those in 1973?
( I remember messurements, our technical director at Thorens G.Weichler did in 1997/98 when we experimented with material in the TP90 tonearm and we had succeded in getting rid of almost the complete tonarm resonance peaks with some material called RDC, which was tested for applications back then. And I also learned, backed up from Ortofon Germany in the 80ies, that compliance/effective mass doesn't give it all and that the reality is simply a bit more complex - Unfortunately of my teachers - I was trainee back then - only One person that could back that up is still alive but still this is what was given to include into my training)
- One question is : is the warp still leading to the same nominal intensity and is it correctly "put into perspective?" - would we messure the same intensity of the effect or would todays tonarm/cartridge/turntable builts significantly differ regarding the amplitudes and range values of the effect? - If so - the weighing as well as the values of these parameters have to be looked at for the "Vinyliser project"
My suspicion is - the behaviour of todays stuff would statistically lead to a slightly different description.
I am digging out my AES books and found this quote on the picture I add by L. Happ and F. Karlov:
From this I recommend to doubt the straight forward use of the warp spectrum as given by Happ & Karlov's paper for the "Vinyliser"
Instead I would suggest to inquire more conservatively into artefacts from the cutting and pressing itself - as these artefacts offer probably more common ground on all vinyl records, than a 43 year old survey based on " ... a great variation in the ability of CURRENT ( alas in 1973) high-quality tone-arm-phonograph combinations..."( L.Happ & F. Karlov)
That what comes to mind is the weighed values of
1. rumble as well as other stuff from the cutting lathes
2. artefacts ( frequencies and distortion figures )from DMM ( two generations of copper qualities - copper to cut used 1980 was different than what Pauler (Stockfisch) claimes is used today
3. artefacts (frequencies and distortion figures ) from laquer cutting
4. Cutter behaviour information if reliable and backed up by today's cutting engineers
5. Vinylparticles ( Vinylgranulat) itself as frequency "noise" ( sorry if I am not aware if pink noise already mimics that well enough)
6. And as clearly audible on e.g. Bauer Ludwighafen Jazz records , the studio tape machines artefacts, if possible to produce a filter that emulates that as well - the dynamical behaviour of master tape recorders have a "signature"
I would find it valuable to have a "Vinyliser" which gives a valid and reliable emulation of the production artefacts themselves - hopefully statistically easier to characterise and "unify"than the playback artefacts
And then seperately , in a second step to add an emulation that represents the playback artefacts - it could be OK for now to use the weighed parameter values of the L. Happ & F. Karlov survey ( even if the starting point of these playback parameters are born from 1973)
Last to point 4)
4) Put it through a peaking highpass filter that emulates the cartridge/arm resonance.
Also here - again a bit conservative, I would like to add this assumed cartridge /arm resonance behaviour seperately to the Vinyliser's topology, because it's character ( the resonance curve) belongs to the playback configuration of today's gear anyway
I have had professional messurements done from Peter Schueller ( who messured practically every excisting turntable that the german Stereoplay and Audio magazines ever reviewed in 35 years) with tonarm cartridge combinations that are nowhere near what was messured in 2005 or before -so I am not so sure about what would be a valuable characteristics to help to validize the hypothesis that the "Vinyliser" is based upon in the first place
The consequences of my aproach would lead to a Vinyliser that can test
various steps seperately :
1. how do emulated production artefacts/vinylcharacteristics influence the "likability" of playback from Digital source material such as CD's or Digital files
2. ( if wanted :master tape artefact added that is mixed into it seperately)
3. switchable playback artefacts - : as a starting point the 1973 warp spectrum but also
4. a switchable alternative spectrum (more modern combinations messurements around that would give some indication what the todays warp spectrum could be? .... if available within reason , based on the doubt that 2016 playback gear would not well enough equal the 1973 gears figures
5. cartridge/ Arm resonance figure based on ??? and emulated
Thanks for reading - I hope it contributes a little to this thread.
Martina
Attachments
The information given by you is very misleading, maybe some further reading in your manual could give you some more insight in the matter.
You have selected part of a description explaining the band filter function of the AP2700, where the RMS value of the content within a selected frequency band can be measured, just as one single figure.
See below the full page 135.
To measure a spectrum, go to page 266, and you see that this function is performed through an FFT, which by definition has fixed bandwidth per filter.
That's why a spectrum analyzer will always display white noise as a flat spectrum
Pink noise on a spectrum analyzer will give a spectrum that looks very much like a RIAA curve.
Hans
Hi Martina,
With great pleasure have I read the link you provided.
I share your concern that a solution made today brings nothing when it solves yesterdays problems.
For instance a periphery ring clamp can be of great help in almost fully suppressing warp, much better than trying to remove the damage later.
For some reason damping mechanisms on the cart, having proven to be successfully to suppress the resonance peak and thereby suppressing IM distortion, never made it to the market with some exceptions that are no longer available.
This is probably because it is not possible to hear the difference with modern equipment, I can think of no other reason.
Hans
Now that is really not very polite, is it?
Actually what I have said is totally accurate because my 2700 does not have DSP capability and I therefore use the bandpass function for this sort of thing.
You raise many interesting points, and I will do a proper answer tomorrow.
I see no reason why it shouldn't- the technology is very much the same. More MC cartridges about, but does that make a difference?
Do lathes put rumble onto records?
I think the element copper is pretty much unchanged.
I am not planning to emulate cutter distortion or groove noise.
I can't follow that section at all.
It will be a separate stage that can be switched out.
Ditto the record warp emulation, sounds complex, and is it really necessary, or desirable actually.
Dan.
Once there was a guy, who didn’t have a saw, but he was the proud owner of a hammer.
So every time he needed to cut something with a saw, he used his hammer instead.
That led him to say: “almost all hammers are saws.”
Attempts to make him aware of the fact that this is not the case, made him even go one step further by saying:
“Actually what I have said is totally accurate because I do not have a saw and I therefore use the hammer for this sort of thing. “
So every time he needed to cut something with a saw, he used his hammer instead.
That led him to say: “almost all hammers are saws.”
Attempts to make him aware of the fact that this is not the case, made him even go one step further by saying:
“Actually what I have said is totally accurate because I do not have a saw and I therefore use the hammer for this sort of thing. “
you cannot emulate the sound of vinyl on any "lossless" digital medium
The biggest part of the vinyl sound distortion comes from the whole cartridge with the limitation of turning into 2 separate voltages a groove. Most cart do 1% to 5 % distortion, and it is accentuated by the tracking and damping of the tonearm.
A good vinyl setup AND a good pressing has more resolution and extension than your CD format, it is obvious at listening.
With the new 192kbs 24 bits both DAC and Cartridge have their unique sound qualities and pitfalls.
The biggest part of the vinyl sound distortion comes from the whole cartridge with the limitation of turning into 2 separate voltages a groove. Most cart do 1% to 5 % distortion, and it is accentuated by the tracking and damping of the tonearm.
A good vinyl setup AND a good pressing has more resolution and extension than your CD format, it is obvious at listening.
With the new 192kbs 24 bits both DAC and Cartridge have their unique sound qualities and pitfalls.
Why not?
I don't doubt it- it's an iffy business at best. Do you have a cite/link for cartridge distortion? I'd be most interested to see a good survey.
I must point out that the Vinyliser is only intended to emulate anti-phase warp signal at low frequencies, to answer a specific psychoacoustic question: see OP. It will not emulate cartridge distortion, mistracking, click & scratches, stylus wow, groove noise, or any of the other ills that vinyl is heir to.
Absolute nonsense.
See above list of vinyl problems.
Don't know what this means.
Once there was a guy, who didn’t have a saw, but he was the proud owner of a hammer.
So every time he needed to cut something with a saw, he used his hammer instead.
That led him to say: “almost all hammers are saws.”
Attempts to make him aware of the fact that this is not the case, made him even go one step further by saying:
“Actually what I have said is totally accurate because I do not have a saw and I therefore use the hammer for this sort of thing. “
Let me be the first to congratulate you on your courteous and constructive contribution to the topic under discussion.
Code:
You can actually buy very convincing software plug-ins that make everything they process sound quite like vinyL. Some even have a selection list for specific cartridges you want to emulate!
Jan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.