I didn't watch the whole video yet, but it seems interesting. What baffles me is that several audiophile meetings like BAF or in this example SFAF are not able to provide clear and well-mixed recording of their speakers. That's really ridiculous 😃 I can't listen to a crumbled, noisy recording like this for almost 3 hours, come on! Where are the recording engineers when we need them?
I don't know whether it was intentional or not, but I love the fact that the link jumps right into the part about proper cartridge loading. The guy even clearly states that you should measure frequency response to find the proper loading. This is absolutely one of my favorite audio pet peeves. Many people go to extremes and obsess over the most miniscule deviations from RIAA deemphasis, yet they never measure their carts frequency response (oh, the horrors!) nor do they ever find out what the proper loading is.
I don't think it's that bad, actually. You can hear that there's some echo cancellation algo at work and voices sound somewhat thin, but overall, the audio recording serves its purpose.
Unfortunately I am not any kind of engineer. This thought just popped up while watching the video, trying to understand what is being said.
Even under very good conditions no one will be able to record & demonstarte over the internet what their loudspeakers sound like. If you believ eit possible you are living in a fantasy world.
dave
Last edited:
Awww I am sorry, I am not a native speaker 😉 Do you get my point now? I was talking about the person that holds a speech, not about loudspeakers.
This speaker/speaker confusion comes up a LOT even in lifetime users of the language. I try to use "talker" when both are in the room but I can't always remember.
This year's BAF, before the show started, sounded like 7 different reverb effects in a large sewer pipe. (Worse here through 2,900 miles of ZOOM and one damaged ear.) Obviously everybody was working to fix it. Mostly once they got a mike ON a talker it was OK.
Noted. Next time I will speak about the talker instead of talking about the speaker.
Jokes aside, I know the solution is to visit this gatherings in person, but I can't afford to fly to the US just to visit BAF. So I am thankful for every bit of recording that is made, whatever quality it may be.
CBS STR 130, Elipson Ultimate Technical Record and B&K QR2010. I record the sweeps and play them back into Room EQ Wizard's RTA, with peak hold switched on.
STR 130 is off, the Elipson is okay and the B&K has been the one that corresponds most to what I think I'm hearing.
I'm not aiming for perfection, I'm aiming for "good enough". Good enough to me is that I can't hear obvious differences in tonality between a CD and LP version of the same release.
Incorrect loading leads to enormous peaks and dips in the frequency response of the MMs I have in my collection. The errors in the test discs I use are rather small in comparison.
And I forgot about the Hifi News test disk, which is garbage. The sweep aliases after what should have been the end so that it plays backwards at full volume for a bit. Either no one caught this, which would be bad, or no one cared, which would be even worse.
How would I go about doing a calibrated measurement?