Jan, your reference to the 6BK4 rings a warning bell. I work with people dealing with medical x-ray equipments in my office where safety is a very serious issue. I hope you are aware of this Generating X-Rays with Receiving Tubes article. Please use proper shielding checked with a dosimeter for your application. Tubes operating above 1kV emit soft x-ray while above 10kV emit hard x-ray. Several milisecond at 10mA of 25kV x-ray exposure is enough for a good chest photo. Just my 2ct.
Yes I am aware of that. Some people even use that as a selling point at eBay! 🙁
In my app, the max HV will be about 6kV. But I found a better one for my app: the 2C53.
I have actually worked on some of the 1st color TVs in Europe at Philips and the cage with this tube had a shield with an interlock switch....
Jan
In my app, the max HV will be about 6kV. But I found a better one for my app: the 2C53.
I have actually worked on some of the 1st color TVs in Europe at Philips and the cage with this tube had a shield with an interlock switch....
Jan
Last edited:
> I have published blind tests that show that people liked vinyl when they
> THOUGHT they were listening to vinyl, even when it was actually digital.
> The same test showed that people didn't like what they THOUGHT was digital,
> even when in reality they were listening to vinyl.
If these tests were "blind", then how did the people get their misguided
impressions of the medium being played ???
> THOUGHT they were listening to vinyl, even when it was actually digital.
> The same test showed that people didn't like what they THOUGHT was digital,
> even when in reality they were listening to vinyl.
If these tests were "blind", then how did the people get their misguided
impressions of the medium being played ???
Jan, Well, what can-I say ? I have vinyls. Some quite rares. And a nice turntable to read them. I love their sleeves and album art. And that is all about.
For those I like and that are not edited in CD, or badly remastered, I just listen to a digital copy of them. De-noised, de-clicked.
I don't share the J.C. preference for analog recording and Vinyl. On the contrary. And I can enjoy CD with no restriction (not always).
But I respect his preference and just try to UNDERSTAND why, without preconceived ideas. And i'm sure there is somethings we have to learn about subjective listening "pleasure" in music reproduction. Numbers don't tell so much.
BTW: How do-you manage people to be mistaken on Digital VS Vinyl ? Adding clicks and friction noise to your digital recordings ? On magnetic tapes VS digital, adding hiss to digital ?
Last edited:
A test isn't blind if people are tricked into giving wrong answers. Doesn't mean anything except for entertainment purposes at parties.
Here's another one: Say to someone, "how do you spell fort like an army fort?" As soon as they spell it quickly say, "what do you eat your cereal with?" If you run the second question by them quickly emphasizing "eat," demphasizing the word cereal and drawing out the word "with," many people will answer "fork."
That doesn't prove they actually like to eat cereal with a fork, or that they can't tell the difference between a fork and a spoon.
Similarly, if you trick someone into believing a source is analog or digital, they may experience some cognitive dissonance, but they will probably tilt in favor of what they "know" to be true, which will override their aural perceptions in how they answer. It only shows that people can be tricked and nothing more.
Here's another one: Say to someone, "how do you spell fort like an army fort?" As soon as they spell it quickly say, "what do you eat your cereal with?" If you run the second question by them quickly emphasizing "eat," demphasizing the word cereal and drawing out the word "with," many people will answer "fork."
That doesn't prove they actually like to eat cereal with a fork, or that they can't tell the difference between a fork and a spoon.
Similarly, if you trick someone into believing a source is analog or digital, they may experience some cognitive dissonance, but they will probably tilt in favor of what they "know" to be true, which will override their aural perceptions in how they answer. It only shows that people can be tricked and nothing more.
As I am prone to mention, this is unfortunate but not necessary. As has been pointed out many times over the last 50 years or so there are other ways to load an MM that give you a nice 6dB roll off, just that for some reason 47k was set in stone and the manufacturers had to work with it.
And don't forget Grado MI which have MC like FR response even into hamstrung phono stages.
Or, you know, characterizes expectation bias. But probably not as useful as as standalone test as a control.
Yep, introducing an obvious bias into a test which is attempting to reduce biases, is unfortunately, not unusual whether done on purpose, as in this case or inadvertently as happens with most audio forum blind tests
Back on this vinyl rise time melarky. What is the fastest rise time that has been measured actually off vinyl out of the RIAA de-emphasis? We talk about square wave response, but that is only a square wave with a flat preamp (and a velocity sensitive cartridge). And in that case the rise time is actually a measure of how many g the stylus can pull changing direction.
(I know John got some fast transients by mistracking and using the impulse as the stylus came crashing down, but these are not real in terms of being recordable or trackable)
(I know John got some fast transients by mistracking and using the impulse as the stylus came crashing down, but these are not real in terms of being recordable or trackable)
I've done the same thing. Good quality vinyl and good quality 16/44 are very hard to discern, if S/N ratios can be managed. HOWEVER, as I have consistently stated, when comparing the very best vinyl (aka: Sheffield Labs Direct to Disk LPs), 16/44 digital fails. Every time.
I think CBS summed it up on the back of STR-112 'Ideally a square wave will be approached' 🙂 .
Interesting. Were these comparisons done blind or sighted? Same masters/material?
Single blind. The subjects did not know they were listening to vinyl or CD. They were told after.
Back in the mid 1980s I acquired some fresh vinyl and the same recordings on CD. Except for noise levels, the result was almost impossible to pick. I used a Sumiko Talisman B cartridge. Known for it's ruthless accuracy. Using the (cheaper) Talsiman A (aluminium cantilever), the results were easily better with the CD and with the more expensive Talisman S (Sapphire cantilever), the results were also worse. The Talisman S seemed to suffer a rather aggressive HF response, that the B lacked.
the question is not what can you put onto vinyl, but what you can recover. With half speed mastering and DMM types of technology, you can create a record with very exaggerated specs, but can you play it? I think in most cases not.
Cheers
Alan
Cheers
Alan
Yes, and does anybody know of a good explanation? It sure sounded like totally different equalization curve was applied for the 16/44 mastering, the difference were just too much. Very difficult for me to accept media as main contributor to the observed difference.
In reality that just tells you that the company behind it were tight ar5es and wouldn't pay for two proper masterings. LP has to be mono below 150Hz, CD can be glorious stereo down to DC. Why hamstring the CD release with the technical limitations of vinyl? No elliptical filters needed in the digital domain.
This also suggests you are relatively immune to the effects of FM or don't listen to (say) piano music. Mark appears to be very sensitive this sort of thing. I do suspect these differing sensitivities play a part.
And yes I have been listening to 60s and 70s vinyl this evening.
@Indra: comparing a direct cut with a CD from the 30IPS backup is expected to sound different. As JC has stated that 30IPS tape is better than vinyl the CD should still of course be superior.
P.S. Life is good, I have been forgiven for my purchase of an SME3009 Series III with ortofon wand 🙂
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.