Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"flipper" wrote in message

Out of curiosity, got any, say circa 1985, CDs?


Last night, after sauna, I was looking at some British remastered pop
CD's from that era. Jethro Tull in particular. They all seemed average
around -18dBFS. In contrast, much current pop material peaks at,
or close to, clipping.


Hang on. How do you know that Jethro Tull Cds didn't peak at close to
clipping ? They're supposed to. That's what good mastering is all about.

The difference is that modern production styles for 'pop' totally smashes
the dynamic range to oblivion. In fact 'modern' CDs may have 'better'
headroom than old ones. A LOT of old CDs included 'digital clips'.

Graham

  #82   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable


An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer 'inherently stable'. Such an
idea is pure horse manure.

Graham

  #83   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


What the hell is the point of monitoring 'perceived loudness'. Have these
people not got EARS to do that ? Measureing 'loudness' with a meter makesa
bout as much sense as giving a fish a bicycle and has always struck me as
being about the lamest excuse you could imagine for using a backward,
technically flawed method !´


It gives a post-production engineer, with the
skill to interpret what he sees, a better
indication of what the compressor is doing
to the overal dynamic that any PPM ever could.

But digital metering is used overall, and normally
(at least on all the CD mastering sessions I have
attended) the envelope is examined at sample level.

The metering needs to tell you something useful such as whether you're
clipping and VUs most certainly haven't a hope in hell of doing that.


No-one claimed it did. He expressed clearly how and why he
found it useful.


Nor
do PPMs exactly either. They're based on metering what is believed not to
sound likes it's clipping, and a PPM won't register momentary clips
either.


Peaking at -8dBFS there won't be any clipping:-)

To avoid 'digital clips' it's necessary to use a 'digital meter' that
registers the exact amplitude of every sample.


Agreed. But take a look at much of the current chart material.
You will find there is often no attempt at all to "avoid digital clips"
This is not due to oversight or incompetence but done to
meet the wishes of the client, whose pop listeners want CDs
to be as loud as possible.

Best regards
Iain


  #84   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"flipper" wrote

Out of curiosity, got any, say circa 1985, CDs?


Last night, after sauna, I was looking at some British remastered pop
CD's from that era. Jethro Tull in particular. They all seemed average
around -18dBFS. In contrast, much current pop material peaks at,
or close to, clipping.


Yes, that's 'modern' music production for you. Go to rec.audio.pro for a
discussion of it every week or two.



I don't need to go anywhere Graham. I am involved
in mastering (though not usually pop material) on almost
a daily basis:-)

Iain


  #85   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
mick mick is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 130
Default No Interconnect is the Best

On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 16:58:05 +0000, Eeyore wrote:

Iain Churches wrote:

A Japanese company recently sent me their catalogue of "superior
non.magnetic resistors"


Somewhat moot since I have yet to find any magnetic resistors. And even
if they were magnetic it wouldn't matter tuppence.



So long as you get the polarity correct. ;-)


--
Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!)
Web: http://www.nascom.info http://mixpix.batcave.net



  #86   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

What the hell is the point of monitoring 'perceived loudness'. Have these
people not got EARS to do that ? Measureing 'loudness' with a meter makesa
bout as much sense as giving a fish a bicycle and has always struck me as
being about the lamest excuse you could imagine for using a backward,
technically flawed method !´


It gives a post-production engineer, with the
skill to interpret what he sees, a better
indication of what the compressor is doing
to the overal dynamic that any PPM ever could.


Don't be ridiculous !

Compressors have GAIN REDUCTION METERS. That's what you monitor, not damn stupid
VU meters.

Sometimes you say things that make me wonder if you ever really worked in sound
engineering.

Graham

  #87   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message

Nor do PPMs catch peaks exactly either. They're based on metering that is

believed not to
sound likes it's clipping, and a PPM won't register momentary clips either.


Peaking at -8dBFS there won't be any clipping:-)


How do you KNOW you're peaking at -8dBFS with a PPM ?

I suspect you're not aware how inaccurate (slow reading) they can be.


Graham

  #88   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

To avoid 'digital clips' it's necessary to use a 'digital meter' that
registers the exact amplitude of every sample.


Agreed. But take a look at much of the current chart material.
You will find there is often no attempt at all to "avoid digital clips"


How do you KNOW ?

Chances are that they're using far more accurate metering than you are. DAWs are
good at that.

Graham

  #89   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

pop listeners want CDs to be as loud as possible.


Clipping, per se, doesn't make it LOUD. Dynamic range control does that. You're
confusing 2 quite different concepts.

Graham

  #90   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:
"flipper" wrote

Out of curiosity, got any, say circa 1985, CDs?

Last night, after sauna, I was looking at some British remastered pop
CD's from that era. Jethro Tull in particular. They all seemed average
around -18dBFS. In contrast, much current pop material peaks at,
or close to, clipping.


Yes, that's 'modern' music production for you. Go to rec.audio.pro for a
discussion of it every week or two.


I don't need to go anywhere Graham. I am involved
in mastering (though not usually pop material) on almost
a daily basis:-)


I believe it would be to your advantage to open your mind to other peoples'
views on the matter too. You might get a more accurate idea of what's going on.
It seems highly flawed to me at present judging by the basis of what you've
written here.

Graham



  #91   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Iain Churches wrote:

A Japanese company recently sent me their catalogue of
"superior non.magnetic resistors"


Somewhat moot since I have yet to find any magnetic
resistors. And even if they were magnetic it wouldn't
matter tuppence.


Tinned steel leads?


  #92   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"flipper" wrote in message


But rather than repeat it, how about some professional
mastering companies?

http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/loudness.html

"In studios with both types of metering present, a point
on the negative dBFS scale would be correlated with a
point on the dBVU scale. Typically this is something like
-20 dBFS = 0 dBVU, so that "0 dB" on a VU meter would
leave approximately 20dB of headroom for signal peaks on
the dBFS scale."


What you don't seem to know is that:

(1) Analog meters don't have instant response and simply average out short
impulses.

(2) A good pro analog tape machine would often not sound too bad if you let
the peaks go up into the +6 to +10 range.

A lot of pro machines were set up for say 1% or less THD at 400 Hz at 0 dB,
and 3% at maybe +6. Good analog tape machines never really clip at
reasonable levels, the tape just sort of mooshes and sort of flattens out
and does something like compression.


http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm


"CDs produced in 1985 had an average (RMS) level of
-18dB."


OK flipper now your problem is clear - you can't tell the diference between
peak and average levels.

The usual peak-to average or crest factor of uncompressed music is never
less than about 8 dB, and can easily be in the 15-20 dB range.



  #93   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
i.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Eeyore" wrote
in message ...



There are no commercial recordings existing that have
a dynamic of even 80dB,


So far so good. But I've got at least one or two that
come close.


Sorry. Close is not good enough.


Wow, Iain who nominated you for a position as a god? ;-)

The statement statement
stands, and comes from an article published by the BPI.
It even includes info from Russian labels such as Origen.


If you could read and comprehend Iain, I sort of agreed with that.

Both at Decca and RCA the two companies of which
I have considerable knowledge, production discs were
mastered to peak at approx 10dB above ref. of -18dBFS.
You can work out the rest, Arny.


I'll stick by my 12 years of observations related to 100s of commercial CDs.

I have before me a set of digital files for the Columbia/Walter set of
Beethoven Symphonies.

If I post the disc stock number and time offset where there is a sample
FS-8 dB, what amount of money will you pay me for my time to find it, Iain?
Bidding starts at $50 of good US devalued cash.



  #94   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

The output of the CD recorder is routed via AES/EBU to
the LO1 position and meters on the Lewo console.


So you sit and watch the meters for the duration of the
recording? What if you blink your eyes?


:-)))

The meter has a peak level marker, which stays in place
until you cancel it, plus the possibility to assign 98
other levels into memory.
It corresponds exactly with the level indicated by the
HHB CD recorder.


Got one of those, and no way would I trust the
information about levels that I get from it for a
question such as the one at hand.


I knew you had. That's why I mentioned it.
What you don't have is the Lewo post-production desk:-)


The Lewo desk can only corrupt the results. I go direct digital with no gain
controls in the signal path.


  #95   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable


An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer
'inherently stable'. Such an idea is pure horse manure.


Yep, in fact NFB that is truely NFB never causes instability. Instability
only comes when a loop that is NFB in the mid band becomes positive feedback
due to phase shift, usually at the frequency extremes.




  #96   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable


An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer
'inherently stable'. Such an idea is pure horse manure.


Yep, in fact NFB that is truely NFB never causes instability. Instability
only comes when a loop that is NFB in the mid band becomes positive
feedback due to phase shift, usually at the frequency extremes.


Good. Things are getting better round here. Arny has made a
statement on topic:-) The FB that may be negative at say 1kHz
may well swing through positive at say 120kHz.

A tube amp without feedback is, by definition, not prone to such
problems.


Iain



  #97   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



--
Iain
Aural perception is a skill that requires study and careful development over
along period of time. Few have it as a natural gift.
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

The output of the CD recorder is routed via AES/EBU to
the LO1 position and meters on the Lewo console.

So you sit and watch the meters for the duration of the
recording? What if you blink your eyes?


:-)))

The meter has a peak level marker, which stays in place
until you cancel it, plus the possibility to assign 98
other levels into memory.
It corresponds exactly with the level indicated by the
HHB CD recorder.

Got one of those, and no way would I trust the
information about levels that I get from it for a
question such as the one at hand.


I knew you had. That's why I mentioned it.
What you don't have is the Lewo post-production desk:-)


The Lewo desk can only corrupt the results. I go direct digital with no
gain controls in the signal path.


Look at the routing schematic. The AES/EBU
returns are direct, and have no controls of any kind in
the signal path. There is no corruption.

Once again, Arny, you remain without cigar:-)

Iain




  #98   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
i.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Eeyore" wrote
in message ...



There are no commercial recordings existing that have
a dynamic of even 80dB,


So far so good. But I've got at least one or two that
come close.


Sorry. Close is not good enough.


Wow, Iain who nominated you for a position as a god? ;-)


The MTA collected data makes a statement. No god has anything
to say in the matter. 80dB is 80dB however much you would
wish it to be otherwise.



The statement statement
stands, and comes from an article published by the BPI.
It even includes info from Russian labels such as Origen.


If you could read and comprehend Iain, I sort of agreed with that.


Please look at the article.

I have before me a set of digital files for the Columbia/Walter set of
Beethoven Symphonies.

If I post the disc stock number and time offset where there is a sample
FS-8 dB, what amount of money will you pay me for my time to find it,
Iain? Bidding starts at $50 of good US devalued cash.


You seem to be short of something useful to do.
Come and mark up a Mahler full-score for me:-)

As I posted earlier. (One of the paragraphs you chose to cut)
There seems be be no world's eye view of mastering levels.
There are non-conformists in every walk of life, not just
religion.

Iain



  #99   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in message

Nor do PPMs catch peaks exactly either. They're based on metering
that is

believed not to
sound likes it's clipping, and a PPM won't register momentary clips
either.


Peaking at -8dBFS there won't be any clipping:-)


How do you KNOW you're peaking at -8dBFS with a PPM ?


One can check this accurately by looking at the envelope as we
have already discussed. The mixer's digital meters are sufficiently
accurate for mastering in particular when the test tones on the
pre-production master has be set up to -18dB with peaking level
as indicated -8dBFS. This is all pretty routine in mastering.


Iain



  #100   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

What the hell is the point of monitoring 'perceived loudness'. Have
these
people not got EARS to do that ? Measureing 'loudness' with a meter
makesa
bout as much sense as giving a fish a bicycle and has always struck me
as
being about the lamest excuse you could imagine for using a backward,
technically flawed method !´


It gives a post-production engineer, with the
skill to interpret what he sees, a better
indication of what the compressor is doing
to the overal dynamic that any PPM ever could.


Don't be ridiculous !

Compressors have GAIN REDUCTION METERS. That's what you monitor, not damn
stupid
VU meters.


Indeed they do. (Don't shout - this is an audio group)
The point was that he used the VU to show what he called
the increase in apparent loudness of the signal. This is
probably easier for the client to understand than a gain
reduction meter.

Iain





  #101   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable


An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer 'inherently stable'.
Such an
idea is pure horse manure.


But trying to introduce more than say 16dB of NFB in a
PP tube amp introduced stability problems which few
homebrew builders have either the skill or equipment to solve.

Compared with this, SET is pretty amicable. That was
my point.

Iain




  #102   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:
"flipper" wrote

Out of curiosity, got any, say circa 1985, CDs?

Last night, after sauna, I was looking at some British remastered pop
CD's from that era. Jethro Tull in particular. They all seemed
average
around -18dBFS. In contrast, much current pop material peaks at,
or close to, clipping.

Yes, that's 'modern' music production for you. Go to rec.audio.pro for
a
discussion of it every week or two.


I don't need to go anywhere Graham. I am involved
in mastering (though not usually pop material) on almost
a daily basis:-)


I believe it would be to your advantage to open your mind to other
peoples'
views on the matter too. You might get a more accurate idea of what's
going on.
It seems highly flawed to me at present judging by the basis of what
you've
written here.


I have a better idea of what is going on that most. It was
I who drew the attention to people on UKRA for instance
as to what was current practice. Most were amazed.
Prof Jim L decided to look into the matter, and based,
on the info I had given him, thought it important enough
to write two articles for a UK mag. Judging by the
aparent lack of feedback, it seems as though the
public were not too interested.

In most cases, other people's views (to which you
think one should open one's mind:-) are not very helpful.
Discussion with the end user is pretty depressing. Most
people neither notice nor care that pop CDs are heavily
compressed and sometimes clipped. Ask them, as I
have done, and they will tell you "Sounds fine to me. I
listen mainly in the car".

Luckily the genre of music in which I work, baroque
(early/pre classical orchestral music) and jazz are not
affected by this "louder is better" syndrome. I have
spoken with record company representatives and
producers who truly believe that they are giving
the public what they (think they) want. The record
companies get very few complaints indeed.

Does your expertise include CD mastering, Graham?
Do you have some constructive views on the subject?
If so, it would be of great interest to hear them

Best regards
Iain






  #103   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Eeyore" wrote
in message
Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable

An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer
'inherently stable'. Such an idea is pure horse manure.


Right. Now if Iain said:

"But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently resistant to instability due to
NFB", he would have an obvious truism, but at least he would be right.

Obviously, an amp can become unstable for reasons other thanpoor design of
the NFB.


Yep, in fact NFB that is truely NFB never causes
instability. Instability only comes when a loop that is
NFB in the mid band becomes positive feedback due to
phase shift, usually at the frequency extremes.


Good. Things are getting better round here. Arny has made
a statement on topic:-) The FB that may be negative at
say 1kHz may well swing through positive at say 120kHz.


A tube amp without feedback is, by definition, not prone
to such problems.


Similar symptom, different cause.



  #104   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default No Interconnect is the Best

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Eeyore" wrote
in message ...


Iain Churches wrote:

But then SET amps traditionally
have little or no NFB and so are inherently stable


An absence of NFB **DOES NOT** make any ampliifer
'inherently stable'. Such an
idea is pure horse manure.


But trying to introduce more than say 16dB of NFB in a
PP tube amp introduced stability problems which few
homebrew builders have either the skill or equipment to
solve.
Compared with this, SET is pretty amicable. That was
my point.


Yes, getting rid of NFB dumbs down amplifier design to the point where naive
dilettantes might be more likely to construct an amplifier that does not
summarily incinerate itself when first turned on.


  #105   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
West West is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 158
Default No Interconnect is the Best


"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi...


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

The output of the CD recorder is routed via AES/EBU to
the LO1 position and meters on the Lewo console.


So you sit and watch the meters for the duration of the recording? What
if you blink your eyes?


:-)))

The meter has a peak level marker, which stays in place until you
cancel it, plus the possibility to assign 98 other levels into memory.

It corresponds exactly with the level indicated by the HHB
CD recorder.


Got one of those, and no way would I trust the information about levels
that I get from it for a question such as the one at hand.


I knew you had. That's why I mentioned it.
What you don't have is the Lewo post-production desk:-)


Biological ears vs. a VU meter...hmmm. I trust my ears, but not always.
Point is that sound perception can change and is not always reliable, even
for those with trained "golden ears." You see, at Iain's work place, the
engineer came in one day with a bad head cold. They couldn't halt production
because his head was all stuffed up so they relied on the VU meter.
Plausible?

west

Iain









  #106   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
West West is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 158
Default No Interconnect is the Best


"Iain Churches" wrote in message
i.fi...


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
i.fi
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi
"Eeyore" wrote
in message ...


There are no commercial recordings existing that have
a dynamic of even 80dB,


So far so good. But I've got at least one or two that
come close.

Sorry. Close is not good enough.


Wow, Iain who nominated you for a position as a god? ;-)


The MTA collected data makes a statement. No god has anything
to say in the matter. 80dB is 80dB however much you would
wish it to be otherwise.



The statement statement
stands, and comes from an article published by the BPI.
It even includes info from Russian labels such as Origen.


If you could read and comprehend Iain, I sort of agreed with that.


Please look at the article.

I have before me a set of digital files for the Columbia/Walter set of
Beethoven Symphonies.

If I post the disc stock number and time offset where there is a sample


FS-8 dB, what amount of money will you pay me for my time to find it,
Iain? Bidding starts at $50 of good US devalued cash.


You seem to be short of something useful to do.
Come and mark up a Mahler full-score for me:-)


As long as it's not his 1st.

west

As I posted earlier. (One of the paragraphs you chose to cut)
There seems be be no world's eye view of mastering levels.
There are non-conformists in every walk of life, not just
religion.

Iain





  #107   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Arny Krueger wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:

A Japanese company recently sent me their catalogue of
"superior non.magnetic resistors"


Somewhat moot since I have yet to find any magnetic
resistors. And even if they were magnetic it wouldn't
matter tuppence.


Tinned steel leads?


You sem to see those more on small signal diodes than resistors IME.

Still doesn't matter of course.

Graham


  #108   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

A tube amp without feedback is, by definition, not prone to such
problems.


'Motorboating' ?

Why do tubes sometimes need grid stopper Rs ? It has NOTHING to do with NFB !

Graham

  #109   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote:

Nor do PPMs catch peaks exactly either. They're based on metering
that is believed not to sound likes it's clipping, and a PPM won't

register momentary clips
either.

Peaking at -8dBFS there won't be any clipping:-)


How do you KNOW you're peaking at -8dBFS with a PPM ?


One can check this accurately by looking at the envelope as we
have already discussed.


And the ONLY way to do that meaningfully is with a wave editor.


The mixer's digital meters are sufficiently
accurate for mastering in particular when the test tones on the
pre-production master has be set up to -18dB with peaking level
as indicated -8dBFS. This is all pretty routine in mastering.


Define 'adequately accurate' please. You accept they may be flawed ?

Graham

  #110   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

What the hell is the point of monitoring 'perceived loudness'. Have
these people not got EARS to do that ? Measureing 'loudness' with a

meter
makes about as much sense as giving a fish a bicycle and has always

struck me
as being about the lamest excuse you could imagine for using a backward,


technically flawed method !´

It gives a post-production engineer, with the
skill to interpret what he sees, a better
indication of what the compressor is doing
to the overal dynamic that any PPM ever could.


Don't be ridiculous !

Compressors have GAIN REDUCTION METERS. That's what you monitor, not damn
stupid VU meters.


Indeed they do. (Don't shout - this is an audio group)
The point was that he used the VU to show what he called
the increase in apparent loudness of the signal. This is
probably easier for the client to understand than a gain
reduction meter.


I think it's completely half-assed myself. In a mix you won't see anything of
value about the level of compression being applied at all.

Graham



  #111   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



Arny Krueger wrote:

..... getting rid of NFB dumbs down amplifier design to the point where naive

dilettantes might be more likely to construct an amplifier that does not
summarily incinerate itself when first turned on.


There is certainly some truth in that. ;~)

Achieving the same result with semiconductors requires rather more skill.

Graham


  #112   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



flipper wrote:

"As I said, if the CD is produced in accordance with EBU
recommendations,


What the **** has the EBU ( a radio and TV based organisation) got to do with
MUSIC PRODUCTION !


as well as the 'original intent' of the CD standard,


There's NO 'intent' in the Red Book standard other than to specify aspects of
how data is presented on an Audio CD. It says NOTHING about dynamic range and it
would be MAD if it did.


nominal program level (not peaks) would normally be around 18dB below
the player's rated 'output voltage', which is specified at 0dBfs
(maximum output)."


PURE NONSENSE !

***** The ratio of peak level to average level is determined by the musical
'style' of the production and ONLY that. *****

Graham

  #113   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best


"West" wrote in message news:mB7mj.795$hM4.92@trnddc07...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
ti.fi...


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

The output of the CD recorder is routed via AES/EBU to
the LO1 position and meters on the Lewo console.

So you sit and watch the meters for the duration of the recording?
What
if you blink your eyes?


:-)))

The meter has a peak level marker, which stays in place until you
cancel it, plus the possibility to assign 98 other levels into memory.

It corresponds exactly with the level indicated by the HHB
CD recorder.

Got one of those, and no way would I trust the information about levels
that I get from it for a question such as the one at hand.


I knew you had. That's why I mentioned it.
What you don't have is the Lewo post-production desk:-)


Biological ears vs. a VU meter...hmmm. I trust my ears, but not always.
Point is that sound perception can change and is not always reliable, even
for those with trained "golden ears." You see, at Iain's work place, the
engineer came in one day with a bad head cold. They couldn't halt
production
because his head was all stuffed up so they relied on the VU meter.
Plausible?


No. Just sad and rather foolish. Get a grip West.

In cases where CDs are mastered close to 0dBFS
(there is no headroom whatsoever) the mastering engineer
needs a lot more than just his ears. (Just as a pilot of even the
smallest plane needs more than just his eyes.) He needs
to be able to see and measure accurately the material
which is being transferred. That's why, when the CD
is completed, the envelope is examined visually at
sample level. Try doing that by ear, golden or not:-)

Cordially
Iain






  #114   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"West" wrote in message news:XD7mj.796$hM4.780@trnddc07...

"Iain Churches" wrote in message


You seem to be short of something useful to do.
Come and mark up a Mahler full-score for me:-)


As long as it's not his 1st.

west


Is the 1st not to your liking West?. The
listener needs to put a lot in to get anything out.
Mahler is not for the faint-hearted.

I am currently interested in Mahler 4 (G major)






  #115   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:43:57 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:
"flipper" wrote in message



http://www.chicagomasteringservice.com/loudness.html

"In studios with both types of metering present, a point on the
negative dBFS scale would be correlated with a point on the dBVU
scale. Typically this is something like -20 dBFS = 0 dBVU, so that "0
dB" on a VU meter would leave approximately 20dB of headroom for
signal peaks on the dBFS scale."


Hi Flipper. Interesting you should mention the VU. The mastering
facility where I work often has digital PPMs, a pair of analogue
PPMs and VUs also. The resident engineer told me that he finds the
VUs extremely useful for their indication of a close approximation
of the "perceived loudness" with compressed material.


Makes sense since that was it's purpose: "Volume Unit" meter.


It is interesting to note the re-appearance of VUs added to the
existing meter overbridge, particularly in mastering suites.

This is
something considered important in the domain of popular
"louder is better" CD mastering.


Sad, isn't it? Makes one wonder a bit about the tem 'artist'.


The artist is not to blame. What the current situation shows is
the total apathy of the public to a poor sounding product which
has been tailored to what seems to be their needs. This is
even more frustrating because the pre-production master is
probably as clean as a whistle:-(

I can't help but think of Lena Lamont, in Singing in the Rain, who
thinks the totally screwed up sound is terrific because it was "good
and loud."

That is precisely the siatuation today. People like those
on this group, who seek and appreciate high quality
audio are sadly just a very small majority.

Yeah. The arguments about people listening mostly in cars and iPODs is
interesting ´


It's a bit more than an argument, it is the result of a study
in which fairly large sections of the public were interviewed
both in the EU and the States.

but I'd much rather have a compressor. or 'automatic level
control', in the playback unit that have it permanently mangled on the
source material.


Yes indeed. That's an option that has been mentioned by many,
who have for example been asking for clean download ".wav" files
instead of, or in addition to the compressed .mp3s which are
currently available.

The same could apply to CD. "Hot or normal , sir?"
Sounds like a kebab bar, doesn't it? :-))


Reminds me of the old tape recorder days and the one and only 'joke' a
fellah I knew back then came up with. Someone had a tape recorder with
"ARC" plastered in it and while he knew "ALC" was "Automatic Level
Control" he wondered what the heck "ARC" stood for. And our 'never
invented a joke before' friend retorted, in his best Japenglish
impersonation, "Autwromatwric wRevel Contwrol."

:-)

Iain





  #116   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Iain Churches wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

What the hell is the point of monitoring 'perceived loudness'. Have
these people not got EARS to do that ? Measureing 'loudness' with a

meter
makes about as much sense as giving a fish a bicycle and has always

struck me
as being about the lamest excuse you could imagine for using a
backward,


technically flawed method !´

It gives a post-production engineer, with the
skill to interpret what he sees, a better
indication of what the compressor is doing
to the overal dynamic that any PPM ever could.

Don't be ridiculous !

Compressors have GAIN REDUCTION METERS. That's what you monitor, not
damn
stupid VU meters.


Indeed they do. (Don't shout - this is an audio group)
The point was that he used the VU to show what he called
the increase in apparent loudness of the signal. This is
probably easier for the client to understand than a gain
reduction meter.


I think it's completely half-assed myself. In a mix you won't see anything
of
value about the level of compression being applied at all.



It is not difficult to understand why he would prefer to
show his clients how, by adding compression, the
"perceived overall listening level" (as he calls it) rises,
as shown on the VU, rather than point out the
"gain reduction" as indicated by the compressor.

When one is working with a pop client whose
objective is to produce a CD as loud and as
punchy as it can possibly be, the term
"gain reduction" is not one that would be used
if the matter can be illustrated in another way.

Simple psychology, Graham.

This is the classical case of comparison of a glass
half full with one that is half empty.

Iain



  #117   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:55:22 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"flipper" wrote in message
. ..

Out of curiosity, got any, say circa 1985, CDs?


Last night, after sauna, I was looking at some British remastered pop
CD's from that era. Jethro Tull in particular.


Good stuff. I've always loved the emotion put into the flute in Bouree
on the Stand Up album, although, their most famous is probably
Aqualung.


An amazing band.

Which one were you looking at?


I have quite a lot of early Tull material on vinyl and the remakes
on CD. The comparisons are interesting.

I listened to:
"Stand Up" (published 1970)
"Awakening" (1971)
"Living In the Past" (1972)
"Passion Play" (1973)
"Broadsword" (1979?)

These were among the first titles to be resissued on CD

They all seemed average
around -18dBFS. In contrast, much current pop material peaks at,
or close to, clipping.


Much of the Jethro Tull material has been
remastered and re-issued more that once.
There are considerable diffferences in, for
example, the versions of "Thick As a Brick"
1979 (vinyl) and the 1988 and 1997 CD versions.
Likewise, "Broadsword" vinyl and first CD
sound very similar indeed, the later (2005) remastering is quite
different. (I avoid the use of the terms "worse" or better")


Yeah. And, frankly, I can't figure out what the heck Arny and Eeyore
think they're 'arguing' about.


Perhaps Graham does not actually know, although
from habit he speak always with considerable implied
authority. And Arny? well dear old Arny will argue
black is white - that's his style:-)

Regards to all
Iain



  #118   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
flipper wrote:

"As I said, if the CD is produced in accordance with EBU
recommendations,


What the **** has the EBU ( a radio and TV based organisation) got to do with
MUSIC PRODUCTION !


Your dishonest snipping of things


I've snipped your previous rambling nonsense only.


to hell and back notwithstanding, the EBU is but one of over a dozen references
I've given, all saying the same thing.


Irrelevant.

You talk nothing but pure and complete horse manure. The music production business
doen't give a fig what the damn self-important EBU says.


Graham

  #119   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Iain Churches[_2_] Iain Churches[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,719
Default No Interconnect is the Best



"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

To avoid 'digital clips' it's necessary to use a 'digital meter' that
registers the exact amplitude of every sample.


Agreed. But take a look at much of the current chart material.
You will find there is often no attempt at all to "avoid digital clips"


How do you KNOW ?


I have looked at a lot of recorded material, and also sometimes
had the chance to compare the CD with the pre-production master.

Chances are that they're using far more accurate metering
than you are. DAWs are good at that.


The team with which I am associated owns a large ProTools
DAW, and a Studer digital editing workstation.

Iain




  #120   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default No Interconnect is the Best



flipper wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

***** The ratio of peak level to average level is determined by the musical
'style' of the production and ONLY that. *****


I am well aware that people can create whatever crap they feel like
and anyone with a better than room temperature I.Q. knows that from
the fact I've said it more than once.


Are you really SO STUPID as to deny the fact I posted above ?

You really are one ignorant ****. You know NOTHING of value and just love posting
irrelevant rubbish presumably to bolster your own moronic idea of 'self-importance'.

Graham

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Optical interconnect Dirk Bruere at NeoPax Pro Audio 6 September 5th 06 01:33 AM
Interconnect "Directionality" Norman M. Schwartz High End Audio 11 August 17th 05 12:30 AM
DIY Interconnect questions Colin Bigam Tech 85 January 27th 04 02:28 AM
SymbiLink Interconnect Sam Carleton Car Audio 0 July 22nd 03 12:48 AM
FS: XLO LIMITED 2m Interconnect 007 Marketplace 0 July 12th 03 02:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:30 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"