agreed +1
but... and this is a big BUT, having a really good system can reek havoc on a cd collection. I have some old cd's that I loved in the 80s but now with a real sound system I just hear the poor production... sigh.
edit: not that I don't get CD's now that are also dissapointing.
Last edited:
Unfortunately it is buried somewhere on file server in a big 24 bit / 96K file chunk.
The point was, just one carpet on the floor may be enough.
Sure, I hear those things too but fortunately they don't bother me much. I've sat behind a console enough to take them as part of the package. It's a recording, I accept it as such.
No, I put panels around. It was a home concert, with amp and speakers. She was on a distance approximately 1-2 feet to the mike. The mike was a large diaphragm condenser (cardioid), with Chinese copy of German capsule, 2SK170 input. I made speakers flat using 31 band EQ, by my method of multiple iterations with feedback rejection by EQ and spectrum indicator.
Panels were made from plywood and memory foam covered by blankets. Without panels of course ambience would be louder, amplified by amps and speakers.
Here is another example, without panels, and no carpet on the floor: http://wavebourn.com/music/kuzmin/velosipedist.mp3
Nice recording, I enjoyed it.
Takes me back to the tube and tape recording my father used to do in the 1960s, only yours is cleaner.
Takes me back to the tube and tape recording my father used to do in the 1960s, only yours is cleaner.
I guess your father would be happy to have large diaphragm condensers with modern FETs and 24/96 DAW...
He wouldn't know what do do with them. 🙂 But I sure do!
Were these cuts done with tube mic preamps?
Were these cuts done with tube mic preamps?
No. 4558 with output stages biased to class A by 7K5 resistors in channel strips. Summing amps use BB/TI OPA1612 chips.
Is this strictly true? For example, if I were simulating the driving of the motor of an electric car with regenerative braking, I couldn't simply model the back emf as a simple circuit of L and C. A speaker may or may not be more 'model-able', but it's not a linear device in any case is it?
Last edited:
One problem is that you're never sure whether two amps really do sound different. I believe that some reports of audible differences are true, but many others cannot be substantiated. There's no way to know which are genuinely audible under controlled circumstances and which will be shown not to be audible under controlled circumstances.
So if you are foolish enough to follow all such reports as genuine, you're chasing ghosts or your tail or both.
If we had some sort of system to isolate the genuine audible difference reports and do some serious work on it, we might be able to actually forward the state of audio reproduction.
jan
'Controlled' is most relevant here, and not just 'controlled blind'. The 'sound' of an amp is most certainly context-dependent because amps don't produce sounds, they produce signals and hence rely on other system components. The mains supply purity could be different under two listening conditions and the resulting 'sound' difference might mistakenly be attributed to the amp. Without comprehensive controls, its really hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.