Because lighter weight, and slightly more affordable. But, I think it is no secret that the "clonewheels" can be a little boring during live performance, sort of generic, like white label no-name economy pizza, is sort of like real pizza, except not exciting.
I'm not exactly sure about the tone wheels themselves (each unit is unique, so we can't quite stereotype them into just one term); however, lack of a leslie and lack of the long metal spring bars back of the keys are some fairly glaring omissions.
If one does happen to have a playable midi keyboard, there's no need to tolerate the onboard sample sounds when there's useful stuff like this:
Tone generation:
1). Download Free Organ plug-in: ORGANized Trio by GSi
2). Tobybear Productions
Still not as good as the real thing, but yet a bit lighter weight and better sound than a sampler.
Meanwhile back to disturbing troubles such as lack of a leslie and keys with a hinge so that you can't use the whole key.
It doesn't always cost like heck.
For the lowest cost hi-fi-ish experience, I'd suggest to avoid computer sound cards powered by the computer's power supply (the Achilles heel of computer audio is the power supply) but rather just use the phone/tablet and this thing: Mini USB Stereo Audio Music Bluetooth Receiver for PC Speaker iPhone Excellent | eBay (that's ebay item 321553862643 ), which has two advantages 1). Its own private power supply (that you choose) and 2). Class AB output, probably. Anyway, that cheap little thing will beat an expensive sound card rather thoroughly. I have used that particular model and was surprised.
It probably isn't the best music source available; however, a nice source at $4.50~$6.00 price range, is rather noteworthy.
For the lowest cost hi-fi-ish experience, I'd suggest to avoid computer sound cards powered by the computer's power supply (the Achilles heel of computer audio is the power supply) but rather just use the phone/tablet and this thing: Mini USB Stereo Audio Music Bluetooth Receiver for PC Speaker iPhone Excellent | eBay (that's ebay item 321553862643 ), which has two advantages 1). Its own private power supply (that you choose) and 2). Class AB output, probably. Anyway, that cheap little thing will beat an expensive sound card rather thoroughly. I have used that particular model and was surprised.
It probably isn't the best music source available; however, a nice source at $4.50~$6.00 price range, is rather noteworthy.
Lynn Olson also suggested (somewhere, no cite today) that the tape mechanism (ie. AAD) provided the compression, supersonic roll off and dithering necessary for decent ADC and thus listenable CDs.
Not a bad place to be, on balance.My manifesto can be summed up as: Analog for sound creation .. and digital for sound reproduction.
Ignoring the whims of "producers" and "executives" who would still screw it up.
Interesting premise, and makes quite a bit of sense.
I use outboard DAC exclusively connected via usb, often a DAC used as reclocker up stream of the DAC as well. ASIO and small market hobbiest players such as the Russian APlayer have good sound. Foobar is good, and has greater playlist flexibility. VLC plays anything but the sound is not very good.
Of course a dedicated music server with a hardware profile for audio only that strips out all other processes, has its advantages too.
I will write a thread on that when I have time...
I wish that I had a large WavPack collection, but unfortunately, that isn't the case.
Instead, what I actually have is a large MP3 collection. This has psycho-acoustic compression, which is hit or miss depending on the harmonics of the playback equipment.
No problem. Here's the LM1875 TurboII. Simple, inexpensive monoblocks with big dynamics, good resolution and a favorable tone.
It needs an offboard power supply, an additional board as simple as 4 more 1N5405 for the br, 4 of 2200uF caps (4400u per rail) and a 1 ampere 36va 18+18vac transformer, per each monoblock. Maximum transformer for either monoblock or stereo is 50va (range 36va~50va), so I suggest making monoblocks (or dualmono). That suggested power supply is not quite strong enough to break the chip, and power output that way is up to 22W.
Option: A 0.47 ohm resistor in series with the + output can be used to block negative output impedance tones, and just basically relax it a little bit; and that will be a lot easier to arrange than any custom speaker cable.
To do something similar, but allow bass down to 44hz~55hz range, we'd First tilt the h1/h2 bass balance by doubling up the 100u cap to 200u, and then second, we could reduce the input cap size as desired (1u cerafine, probably) to finish the job of super clean pleasant bass.
We don't want to tune the amp for boom-only or thud-only, because only a favorable even blend of both will cancel bass distortion at the amplifier. And if you're tuning it to assist one particular speaker, the matter could take some experimentation with the filter values.
That works in most cases.
but not all. . .
If tuning only the amp, there may still be a shortfall of bass clarity at the speaker. However, these cases can be partially corrected at the speaker, with a capacitor series to the negative and carefully sized to promote progressive current drive bass extension. The typical range is 1000u~6600u for an 8 ohm woofer, or larger if there's a heavy load large woofer. Finding the perfect capacitance is necessary and will take experimentation. At best, that correction is only worth a couple of decibels, which is quite similar to 2/3rds of the amplifier's power (double the power is only 3db at the speaker), and that figure might look a little more useful. I really wish I'd have heard news about that, so much sooner.
So, there's some options to remove disturbingly thrumming bass distortion from the input, from the amplification and from the speaker, without actually removing the bass.
Instead, what I actually have is a large MP3 collection. This has psycho-acoustic compression, which is hit or miss depending on the harmonics of the playback equipment.
No problem. Here's the LM1875 TurboII. Simple, inexpensive monoblocks with big dynamics, good resolution and a favorable tone.
It needs an offboard power supply, an additional board as simple as 4 more 1N5405 for the br, 4 of 2200uF caps (4400u per rail) and a 1 ampere 36va 18+18vac transformer, per each monoblock. Maximum transformer for either monoblock or stereo is 50va (range 36va~50va), so I suggest making monoblocks (or dualmono). That suggested power supply is not quite strong enough to break the chip, and power output that way is up to 22W.
Option: A 0.47 ohm resistor in series with the + output can be used to block negative output impedance tones, and just basically relax it a little bit; and that will be a lot easier to arrange than any custom speaker cable.
I have two like that, so I think I know what you mean there.miragem3i said:
To do something similar, but allow bass down to 44hz~55hz range, we'd First tilt the h1/h2 bass balance by doubling up the 100u cap to 200u, and then second, we could reduce the input cap size as desired (1u cerafine, probably) to finish the job of super clean pleasant bass.
We don't want to tune the amp for boom-only or thud-only, because only a favorable even blend of both will cancel bass distortion at the amplifier. And if you're tuning it to assist one particular speaker, the matter could take some experimentation with the filter values.
That works in most cases.
but not all. . .
If tuning only the amp, there may still be a shortfall of bass clarity at the speaker. However, these cases can be partially corrected at the speaker, with a capacitor series to the negative and carefully sized to promote progressive current drive bass extension. The typical range is 1000u~6600u for an 8 ohm woofer, or larger if there's a heavy load large woofer. Finding the perfect capacitance is necessary and will take experimentation. At best, that correction is only worth a couple of decibels, which is quite similar to 2/3rds of the amplifier's power (double the power is only 3db at the speaker), and that figure might look a little more useful. I really wish I'd have heard news about that, so much sooner.
So, there's some options to remove disturbingly thrumming bass distortion from the input, from the amplification and from the speaker, without actually removing the bass.
This seems perfectly reasonable, especially considering the ADC technology around at the time that CD was gaining traction.
I think another problem was that the engineers at the time had learnt their craft on multitrack tape, which gives compression and limiting by default. When they went over to digital recording systems this was gone, and the result was some dreadfully hard and thin sounding rock recordings, followed by a backlash against digital.
Idiot proof is maybe a little unfair. Modern digital production is a blank canvas with a bazillion plugins to create any sound you want (including ear-bleeding crap) but you have to know what you want and understand how to achieve it, which is quite hard.
The old analog tape-based studio had its own default sound that happened to be perfect for popular music. Or maybe we perceive it as perfect because we grew up with it, but this distinction isn't really important at this point in time. (It will be in 25 years time 🙂 )
The old analog tape-based studio had its own default sound that happened to be perfect for popular music. Or maybe we perceive it as perfect because we grew up with it, but this distinction isn't really important at this point in time. (It will be in 25 years time 🙂 )
Last edited:
Analogue is idiot proof in the sense that when you operate it outside its design parameters, it still sounds nice. This doesn't happen with digital, here you need to always be inside the design parameters. Iow no clipping.
Producers used to analogue gear, pushing the levels into saturation causing nice compression and distortion artefacts, did the same with digital. This did not work so good.
But there are very good sounding records from those early digital day's: Joe Jackson - Body and Soul from 1984 is a great example. This recording used the dynamic range digital can provide without clipping. Result a fantastic sounding album.
Hi!
In most of these discussions you are talking about Vinyl versus CD.
But what if today's modern technology and materials would build again and develop the gramopone???? Pure music without any analog or digital electronics problem. Without a speaker, just horn.....
Could we reach with it the HiFi quality?
Greets:
Tyimo
In most of these discussions you are talking about Vinyl versus CD.
But what if today's modern technology and materials would build again and develop the gramopone???? Pure music without any analog or digital electronics problem. Without a speaker, just horn.....
Could we reach with it the HiFi quality?
Greets:
Tyimo
I agree... just re-listening several (digitized) analog recorded Creedence Clearwater Revival albums... they are absolutely stunning! 😎😎😎
I do not think the discussion is about vinyl vs. CD... It's about analog vs. digital recorded music from different era..
Recording methods in the old days were different from modern methods. And it's the modern methods that usually suck.
O.K. I say therefore to reinvent the high end version of modern times Gramophone/Phonograph. That would be the purest analog music.
It's still possible with the digital techniques to make a good recording in the old-skool tradition.. It's about the method of recording, not about technical issues.
As modern digital technology is completely transparent, practically maintenance free and very simple to operate, its much easier to make a good recording.
Its not the technology that f*#% things up, its the people turning the knobs and the people insisting it has to sound as loud as possible.
I absolutely agree.... but also the guys thinking a mic almost inside of the instrument provides optimal sound...
That would be a hard position to credibly maintain during the demo I heard at the 2014 TAVES in the Mark Jones room below. The noise floor was set by the master tape and the dynamics with a solo vocal/guitar piece approached frightening with complete fluidity and lack of any perceptible distortion. None of the gear other than the Tannoys was familiar and I didn't know it was vinyl until mid way through the piece. Far and away the most convincing and realistic playback I heard this year. Granted, that was vinyl at its best but it was still vinyl.
To forestall the usual straw men or stereotypes, my vinyl gear and CD player have been stowed for years. All my listening is server hosted material or earphones & portable, much of it the live recordings dismissed earlier in this thread as not 'engineered enough', irony for a fidelity thread.
Attachments
I have both systems for playback and use both, neither are perfect and I enjoy the experience of both...my choice on what system to listen to depends on:
My mood...
Availability of source material (must copy my obscure records to disk one day)...
How retro I am feeling, I love the whole experience of putting a record on; instead of picking a tune of a touch screen🙂
Interestingly I can create analogue looking photos very successfully from my digital images.....
My mood...
Availability of source material (must copy my obscure records to disk one day)...
How retro I am feeling, I love the whole experience of putting a record on; instead of picking a tune of a touch screen🙂
Interestingly I can create analogue looking photos very successfully from my digital images.....
- Status
- Not open for further replies.