Somebody's else opinion (Funny, he says EXACTLY the same thing than me).
Magnetic Phono Pickup Cartridges
Magnetic Phono Pickup Cartridges
Personally, these are more my cup of tea - The Holographic Hornlet Speakers - Hammacher Schlemmer ...
Frank
fas42,
Those Hammacher speakers aren't much different than the tapped horns here on the diy site. A rear loaded horn is a joke, I stay off those threads as they just don't make any practical sense. The output from the cone can never be matched with the output of the horn, a stupid proposition if you ask me.
Those Hammacher speakers aren't much different than the tapped horns here on the diy site. A rear loaded horn is a joke, I stay off those threads as they just don't make any practical sense. The output from the cone can never be matched with the output of the horn, a stupid proposition if you ask me.
I just loved it as a piece of visual "humour" ...
On another point, a bit off topic, but relevant to the general conversation here I always find it hilarious when someone posts a waveform from a (usually very expensive) display that "proves" a signal has a "problem", or is "perfect". One would be struggling to see anything happening, either way, more than about -40dB down; but then the conversation turns to the terrible importance of artifacts at say -120dB down. There's a whole big world between those two, folks ...
Frank
Last edited:
Err.rrh! Your circuit has at least 10dB of extra unnecessary noise for most Moving Coil cartridges. The choice of AD797, though inappropriate, fades into insignificance compared to the evils of YOUR poor circuit design.
Would you like to tell us which moving coil cartridge(s) you "optimised" the design for?
Didn't you tell us the loony .. I mean Golden Pinnae press, caned JC2 Mk1?
Last edited:
While, today, near everybody can have a recording studio at home, of a better technical quality than the professional ones in 1970, an affordable reflex camera body able to make movies of better definition (Look at the last Nikons) than the 70mm Panavision of the same 70s, i'm surprised by the actual poverty of the musical or cinematographic production.
We are talking about audio reproduction, here, fighting for microscopic details, but the emotion is somewhere else. I was shocked by the response of John about CDs "i don't do CDs". What kind of records can-he play, then ?
Are-we building systems to listen to systems ?
A lot of people have great knowledge, over here, and discuss about a lot of technical aspects (distortion, noise etc.) while nobody is able to give any imput on their degree of influence in the listening experience. Are we'd all gone mad?
We are talking about audio reproduction, here, fighting for microscopic details, but the emotion is somewhere else. I was shocked by the response of John about CDs "i don't do CDs". What kind of records can-he play, then ?
Are-we building systems to listen to systems ?
A lot of people have great knowledge, over here, and discuss about a lot of technical aspects (distortion, noise etc.) while nobody is able to give any imput on their degree of influence in the listening experience. Are we'd all gone mad?
I can't help but agree with all of that, Christophe. Most people seem to be locked into some strange nostalga about a certain sort of "hifi sound" - I heard tonnes of that at the recent Sydney audio show - a sort of flat, "nice", small sound that degenerated into something that you wouldn't tolerate for very long if you wound up the volume a bit. What surprised me was that the analogue was nearly all mediocre. Only one company, demonstrating in several rooms, seemed to understand what it's all about -- both their analogue and digital setups, using totally different gear, had the signature of decent replay ...
Frank
And while I've got a couple of recording experts around, someone may be able to help with an interesting "distortion" artifact: a jazz compilation CD, Stan Getz Quartet, "When the World was Young". There's what I think is called a birdie whistling audible in the spaces at times, like the old short wave radio transmissions slightly varying in frequency, and a back and forth, high frequency beat frequency effect coming through.
Anyone know what this would have been caused by?
Frank
Anyone know what this would have been caused by?
Frank
Brad, that sounds more like a MM, a Shure or ADC (if it wasn't for the resistance. High output MCs were typically 500R. The Grados, though with less than most MMs, still had enough inductance that you had to take it into account for response & noise. MM Ortofons were typically 800R + 600mH. I used to have data for loadsa MM & MC cartridges.
I attach 1/3 8ve noise plots of a good MM system c/f probably the quietest MC preamp in the known universe in practice.
Here's a 1/3 8ve noise plot. The B&K 2307 chart recorder has slipped by 1 tooth so 50Hz (hum) appears at 40Hz. 1dB/division
The MM is an Ortofon VMS20E. The Ortofon MC, either MC20-2 or MC10. The MC preamp is set for very high gain 28.8dB so if adjusted for equal loudness from the 2 cartridges, the noise advantage of my little circuit is even better.
What this shows is that with the common noise weightings, the MC with this circuit is at least 3dB better than the MM into a good MM RIAA preamp. But the character of the noise is nicer too. With RIAA, MM noise is whitish while MC is redder than pink and less obtrusive.
If you can match a MC properly, you'll get better S/N than MM. MCs have quite high power output even if voltage is low. MM is inherently inefficient in comparison. Also the inductance doesn't let you get close to true efficiency except for 1 frequency.
Does ultra low noise on vinyl playback matter?
I think so. From analysing my listening test results and ignoring any obvious Golden Pinnae raving, there is a sense of less grittiness and also the system seems to disassociate clicks, pops & record noise from the music. Maybe a noise modulation effect. But I'm probably pontificating from the wrong orifice and it was 30+ yrs ago.
Scott, is that the one where they use a MM example and work out noise in 1/3 8ve bands? I'd appreciate a ref. I've been trying to find it since 2008.Scott Wurcer said:
Attachments
Last edited:
The Ortofon is (was?) the X5-MC, and those data were stated by them, as well as their description as a high-output moving coil. How they managed that L with that small R was not disclosed 🙂
And people even said it sounded good! I need to get one --- they weren't terribly expensive.
That's the key to getting good sound. Right there. The noises, distortion added to the mix by the replay gear moves to another place, another "space". And the ear/brain does its job, that thousand of generations of evolution have groomed it to do, be able to keep the sound coming in, in separate boxes, the listener switches off the extraneous noises and distortion and only tunes into the musical message. Comfortably, naturally, without effort ...
Frank
Not if you build the PSU properly 😉
Ahhh - I sense the presence of another clean power supply fanatic 😀
Thanks for listing all your thoughts - there are some I hadn't thought of.
I like the sound of multiple paralleled snubberized film bypass caps ( to smooth out the characteristic sound of electrolytics )
Last edited:
Christophe,
I don't imagine that you are saying to toss out a multichannel Neve console and replace it with a $500 Mackie desk and say you have a professional recording studio sound? You know there is much more to it than just getting new cheap consumer quality gear, it doesn't make any sense to me to think that way. Besides the fact that they don't have the proper studio rooms or playback equipment, microphones and everything else that makes the difference between pro studio gear and amateur gear there is the training in every other aspect of getting the sound correct. Now if you are talking hip hop or something like that, just bump the bass and get out the harmonizer and your half way home.......
Same goes for the Nikon statement. While I don't develop my own film any more and don't have a dark room to play in there was an art to making a great picture with film. Even without the film and using digital there is still a difference between a great glass lens and many of the cheap plastic camera lenses. I think you can add all the mega-pixels that you ever want and that will not make you a great photographer or have a great eye to capture an image. I still have an old German Kodak with Schnider lens, there is just something about German or Swiss optics that you aren't getting from a cheap lens.
I don't imagine that you are saying to toss out a multichannel Neve console and replace it with a $500 Mackie desk and say you have a professional recording studio sound? You know there is much more to it than just getting new cheap consumer quality gear, it doesn't make any sense to me to think that way. Besides the fact that they don't have the proper studio rooms or playback equipment, microphones and everything else that makes the difference between pro studio gear and amateur gear there is the training in every other aspect of getting the sound correct. Now if you are talking hip hop or something like that, just bump the bass and get out the harmonizer and your half way home.......
Same goes for the Nikon statement. While I don't develop my own film any more and don't have a dark room to play in there was an art to making a great picture with film. Even without the film and using digital there is still a difference between a great glass lens and many of the cheap plastic camera lenses. I think you can add all the mega-pixels that you ever want and that will not make you a great photographer or have a great eye to capture an image. I still have an old German Kodak with Schnider lens, there is just something about German or Swiss optics that you aren't getting from a cheap lens.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.