Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of
the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On May 13, 5:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music It's waning crescent, so McCoy will be howling at its loudest. Nothing of substance but lots of self-aggrandizing, self-serving lies. Time to get its meds ajdusted... once again. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Peter Wieck a scris: On May 13, 5:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music It's waning crescent, so McCoy will be howling at its loudest. Nothing of substance but lots of self-aggrandizing, self-serving lies. Time to get its meds ajdusted... once again. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA I thought you kill filed him. uyou keep telling everyone else to do that. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On May 13, 6:58 pm, Clyde Slick wrote:
Peter Wieck a scris: On May 13, 5:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music It's waning crescent, so McCoy will be howling at its loudest. Nothing of substance but lots of self-aggrandizing, self-serving lies. Time to get its meds ajdusted... once again. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA I thought you kill filed him. uyou keep telling everyone else to do that.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - McCoy bears watching.... much as Kudzu, deer ticks or toadstools. Unlike the Morein coterie, it pretends to have something to say. Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Jon Yaeger" wrote in message
What media doesn't require some bit of tinkering? Digital media. FM transmission has pre-emphasis; Ignoring the complexities of stereo, which are significant. tape has NAB equalization. And bias. Even your beloved CDs have a layer for Reed-Solomon error correction, Irrelevant because it has nothing but positive effects on signal quality. sampling rates, Which have been rasied to insane levels of ovekill and D/A conversion. Which is one of the most perfected processed in audio. Better stick to bike rides and pasta. Better stick to something that you understand, Jon. That leaves audio out of your diet. |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Jon Yaeger" wrote in message Better stick to something that you understand, Jon. That leaves audio out of your diet. And recording out of yours, Arny!! :-) Iain |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. Patrick Turner. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. Patrick Turner. I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a boon. I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that chaniging the music is quick and easy. There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other medium, no matter how much money you spent. Andre Jute Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of fidelity. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Andre Jute" wrote in message ps.com... Patrick Turner wrote: But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. Crazy old ****er's not wrong there.... I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. You do? I saw some rather good pix you posted recently and a couple of your bike with a *heartrate monitor* (?) did I not? Here's a picture of my current bike: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/mybi...%20GSX1400.jpg It allows me to do 0 to *very naughty* whenever I can or want without even breaking a sweat!! ;-) I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers OK, we are back on the same track again..... All is good, all is calm.... |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Keith G wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote in message I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. You do? I saw some rather good pix you posted recently and a couple of your bike with a *heartrate monitor* (?) did I not? I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead. Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player, and officially certified to have "the heart of an ox". The heartrate monitor is to keep my heart beating in the aerobic regions; when the HRM beeps those who cycle with me know to slow down. More about my bikes at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/B...20CYCLING.html Here's a picture of my current bike: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/mybi...%20GSX1400.jpg Uh-huh. An overage hooligan -- says Andre who is still an honorary president of the Johannesburg Hell's Angels. (It cost me a containerload of beer but was cheap at the price because it also saved me a beating. How the hell was I to know that the guy whose policeman's hat I lifted was an Angel?) It allows me to do 0 to *very naughty* whenever I can or want without even breaking a sweat!! ;-) Sweat is precisely the point. 91.5Kg... I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers OK, we are back on the same track again..... All is good, all is calm.... I'm so fit that, when people bother me, my blood pressure goes *down*. Andre Jute "You don't need global feedback to build a good-sounding amplifier." -- Henry Pasternack |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Andre Jute wrote:
Uh-huh. An overage hooligan -- says Andre who is still an honorary president of the Johannesburg Hell's Angels. (It cost me a containerload of beer but was cheap at the price because it also saved me a beating. How the hell was I to know that the guy whose policeman's hat I lifted was an Angel?) Now that I very much doubt, I can imagine the beer saving you from a beating, but I can see it providing you any membership rights. Care to show us a picture of your rockers? -- Nick |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Andre Jute" wrote in message oups.com... Keith G wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote in message I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. You do? I saw some rather good pix you posted recently and a couple of your bike with a *heartrate monitor* (?) did I not? I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead. Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player, and officially certified to have "the heart of an ox". I've only got the dick of an ox... :-) |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead.
Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player, Hmmm.... that would be just under 202 pounds, figure at about 5'-9" (1.75 meters) = BMI of 29.8.... Using metric numbers, a BMI of 29.9. Obese is 30. If one calculates based on the "average" that individuals undercount their weight by ~5 pounds, or 2kg, it is obese. In McCoy's case, using only 2kg is generous given its love of the truth. No wonder nothing but shadow-pictures, and claims of great height (but only while riding). Rugby player... Peter Wieck Wyncote, PA |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
In article .com,
Andre Jute wrote: I gave up the car altogether about 1990 and took up bicycling instead. Now I'm 91.5kg, not too far over the days when I was a rugby player, and officially certified to have "the heart of an ox". The heartrate monitor is to keep my heart beating in the aerobic regions; when the HRM beeps those who cycle with me know to slow down. Did the wife also give up the car, or does she still use it? Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On 13 May 2007 19:17:07 -0700, Andre Jute wrote:
I define what I want the sound to be and to do As long as you don't define it for anyone else. Oh wait, that's pretty much what you did. |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
dave weil said: I define what I want the sound to be and to do As long as you don't define it for anyone else. Oh wait, that's pretty much what you did. Nonconformity is a cardinal sin in the Hive. But you knew that. -- Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
dave weil wrote: On 13 May 2007 19:17:07 -0700, Andre Jute wrote: I define what I want the sound to be and to do As long as you don't define it for anyone else. Oh wait, that's pretty much what you did. I write for intelligent people, Dave. They make up their own minds whether what I say makes sense. I wouldn't expect someone like you to be able to follow in my footsteps. Unsigned for the usual reason |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Andre Jute said: I define what I want the sound to be and to do As long as you don't define it for anyone else. Oh wait, that's pretty much what you did. I write for intelligent people, Dave. They make up their own minds whether what I say makes sense. I wouldn't expect someone like you to be able to follow in my footsteps. You mistook what dave meant. -- Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On May 13, 7:17 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a boon. Gee, once an LP gets well cleaned when purchased, putting one on to play takes, what, less than 30 seconds? I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. snip Or perhaps some people simply like the sound of some LPs. |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Andre Jute" wrote in message ps.com... Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. Patrick Turner. I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a boon. I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that chaniging the music is quick and easy. There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other medium, no matter how much money you spent. Andre Jute Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of fidelity. And I am not taking a position on the vinyl vs.CD debate but I am wondering if the convenience of playing both mediums were equal, which would you prefer? Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs? Thanks in advance. west |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
west wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote in message ps.com... Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. Patrick Turner. I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a boon. I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that chaniging the music is quick and easy. There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other medium, no matter how much money you spent. Andre Jute Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of fidelity. And I am not taking a position on the vinyl vs.CD debate but I am wondering if the convenience of playing both mediums were equal, which would you prefer? That's a good question, West. I would choose CD because it doesn't wear and it is small. I have 6000 CDs (or so) in a fraction of the space consumed by 8000 LPs. Vinyl is (for me) simply a nuisance unjustified by whatever extra audiophiles claim to hear in the grooves. Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs? Quad CD66 and CD67, very old, very reliable. Both of mine were on lease to the BBC, then checked over at the factory before they came to me about fifteen years ago. Thanks in advance. west Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Andre Jute" wrote in message ps.com... west wrote: "Andre Jute" wrote in message ps.com... Patrick Turner wrote: Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. Patrick Turner. I used to have c8000 vinyl discs, including some old shellac. I sold the important subcollections and gave the rest away. Vinyl is just too time-consuming. So much music to listen to, so little time. CDs are a boon. I think there is a certain masochism afield among audiophiles. Like Morgan owners, or MG owners, they think that hardship on one's pleasures is a symptom of manliness. I don't. I always preferred Porsche. cars that worked and offered a modicum of comfort, and big- engined fast tourers rather than harsh, loud sports cars. Same in my sound systems. I define what I want the sound to be and to do, and then put it together like that. That is why I think horns and panels are important, and ultra-simple amplifiers -- and CDs, so that chaniging the music is quick and easy. There is nothing wrong with CD sound quality; it is better than good enough. I decided to go over solely to CD on the day Nimbus, who transfer ancient discs to CD, sent me a box of CDs including one of Ponselle that was better than anything you could buy on any other medium, no matter how much money you spent. Andre Jute Our legislators managed to criminalize fox-hunting and smoking; when they will get off their collective fat backside and criminalize negative feedback? It is clearly consumed only by the enemies of fidelity. And I am not taking a position on the vinyl vs.CD debate but I am wondering if the convenience of playing both mediums were equal, which would you prefer? That's a good question, West. I would choose CD because it doesn't wear and it is small. I have 6000 CDs (or so) in a fraction of the space consumed by 8000 LPs. Vinyl is (for me) simply a nuisance unjustified by whatever extra audiophiles claim to hear in the grooves. Next question, if you don't mind ...what are you using to play your CDs? Quad CD66 and CD67, very old, very reliable. Both of mine were on lease to the BBC, then checked over at the factory before they came to me about fifteen years ago. Thanks in advance. west I guess you're not into SACDs or keeping up with the Jones'. Do you use a high efficiency horn or those ESL 57s? I'm trying to picture your system from some of your posts. Perhaps you use 2 systems. west Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Patrick Turner" wrote in message
Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music I doubt you really know what you are missing out upon. But all the really keen musically eclectic ppl i know who have vast cd collections indicating a misspent middle age also still enjoy vinyl. Most find that despite the vast sums they have spent on cd players and transports, da converters, isolation platforms and other widgets and gadgets, the humble black disk continues to delight, and give a greater sense of connection to the artist than any CD manages to do. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. Mind you, the whole analog recording process onto tape et all is a huge bodge to. So is FM stereo mulptiplexing. Never mind the bodges, the sound does not seem to suffer, when they do it right, IMHO. If you can't hear the damage that vinyl and analog tape do, then maybe you can even personally defend the use of tubes. |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Patrick Turner wrote:
Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. I have been present at a number of AB comparisons where a CD version and vinyl version of the same material from the same grand old master tape was being played, and we could switch from one to the other, and vinyl seemed to have more to offer the audiophile subjectively. I myself never could get my vinyl to sound excellent, but I probably have made some fundamental mistake in setting up my turntable (a Sony from 1977 and an Empire cart). And some of my records just seem to be badly manufactured (45 singles seem to be particularly awful, over modulated more often than not). Some of the music (yes, top 40 pop from the 60's and 70's) I wanted can be found only on crappy singles until CD compilations came out. CDs are a lot less fussy (though it is possible to muck up a CD (dirt, hair, scratches)). |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On May 13, 6:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote:
Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music What the hell is "bodge"???? |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Gerry wrote:
On May 13, 6:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music What the hell is "bodge"???? A very expressive English word meaning a crude fix, a makeshift arrangement. S. -- http://audiopages.googlepages.com |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Serge Auckland" wrote in message ... Gerry wrote: On May 13, 6:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music What the hell is "bodge"???? A very expressive English word meaning a crude fix, a makeshift arrangement. No, that's Wrongipedia for 'botch' - bodge means making chair legs or summat. See: http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-bod1.htm |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
On Mon, 14 May 2007 12:04:28 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: No, that's Wrongipedia for 'botch' - bodge means making chair legs or summat. See: In the usage I know, "botch" is pejorative, it implies making a mess of the job. "Bodge" is more neutral. "It's a bodge, but it's held up very well." cf "Jury-rigged". The woodworking derivation is interesting, but doesn't prove much :-) |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message ... On Mon, 14 May 2007 12:04:28 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: No, that's Wrongipedia for 'botch' - bodge means making chair legs or summat. See: In the usage I know, "botch" is pejorative, it implies making a mess of the job. "Bodge" is more neutral. "It's a bodge, but it's held up very well." cf "Jury-rigged". The woodworking derivation is interesting, but doesn't prove much :-) Eau cointreau, a Bodger is/was 'real person' (ie existed once) - see: http://www.bodgers.org.uk/ I'm surprised Pat *Turner* doesn't appear to know that. Likewise, a 'sagger maker' is/was a real person (I have seen saggers myself) - as was a 'sagger maker's bottom knocker'.... HTH |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Laurence Payne wrote: On Mon, 14 May 2007 12:04:28 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: No, that's Wrongipedia for 'botch' - bodge means making chair legs or summat. See: In the usage I know, "botch" is pejorative, it implies making a mess of the job. "Bodge" is more neutral. "It's a bodge, but it's held up very well." cf "Jury-rigged". The woodworking derivation is interesting, but doesn't prove much :-) Laurence has got it spot on. A bodger might be used to line up two intransigent holes so components can be bolted together. Andre Jute Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/ "wonderfully well written and reasoned information for the tube audio constructor" John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare "an unbelievably comprehensive web site containing vital gems of wisdom" Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Gerry wrote: On May 13, 6:33 pm, Andre Jute wrote: Seeing all the posts about RIAA filters, I can only say I hope none of the participants passed on the gene of obsessive shortsightedness that draws audiophiles into the wastelands of RIAA. Vinyl discs are bad enough when good clean CD's are available, but RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. Two bodges don't make it right. Andre Jute uses only CD and so has time for more music What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? There are piles of reasons, and its difficult to get a band to behave for 25minutes max and play perfectly so a direct to disc can be cut. This would remove the bodge that is involved with all analog tape recording. Lots of AC bias at 38kHz, and lots of eq...bah, that's bodging the signal. In fact, analog is one big bodge after another. NFB is a bodge where one trys to correct amplifier errors by comparing the input and output signals and amplifying the difference to cancel the errors while you amplify the wanted signal. In my book, just because such skulduggery looks cunningly evil, it does seem only regretable, rather than being criminal, and afaiac, NFB bodging does work when done properly. But at the end of the day, all the frequencies present at recording need only be at quite close to the same relationship at the speaker on replay and we have hi-fi, and the bodges make all that more effortlessly possible, as well as reducing noise. THD and IMD are introduced, but can be kept to tolerable levels so low you don't realize they are present. CD gave us convenience. I don't find all of them to be sonically virtuous. I have only to think about the gross eq and bodging done by guys in the post recording processing and I shudder.... I do know guys who would never use vinyl, but have someone record off old records to make a decent digital file, then they play it back using a reasonable transport, then use a DA converter costing a bomb made in limited numbers and with much better sound than the DA in most generic CD players. They say they get better sound this way compared to fussing around with a real TT and phono amp, and keeping records clean. My tip would be to try something from http://www.lavryengineering.com/index_flash.html Not all digital sounds the same. Patrick Turner. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
John Byrns wrote:
In article , Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. You have that graph upside down. HF is boosted for disc cutting and reduced on playback to reduce noise (among other reasons). Not many people know that preemphasis is also an option for CDs. -- Eiron. May contain traces of irony. |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
Eiron wrote: John Byrns wrote: In article , Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. You have that graph upside down. HF is boosted for disc cutting and reduced on playback to reduce noise (among other reasons). No, I have the graph exactly the correct way around. The RIAA disk cutting curve reduces the high frequency groove amplitude by roughly 12 dB using a shelving equalizer with time constants of 318.3 usec. and 75 usec. You are the one that has his RIAA groove amplitude graph upside down, I suggest doing a little homework before making further comment so as not to embarrass yourself in public. Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
John Byrns wrote:
In article , Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. Regards, John Byrns The reason the HF is turned down by the RIAA EQ is to reduce surface noise. LPs are essentially a constant velocity system, so higher frequencies can be boosted on record as their amplitude on the record is reducing, and cut back on playback, together with the surface noise. Low frequencies are turned down by the RIAA EQ to reduce their amplitude so as to ensure the 20 minutes or so playing time per side. If they were cut flat, the increasing amplitude would mean that much more space would have to be left between grooves, reducing the playing time very significantly. This is an example of " necessity being the mother of invention" It was necessary to reduce low frequency amplitude, so also deriving the benefit of reducing HF surface noise too. This principle was applied later to FM radio, where an HF preemphasis/deemphasis reduces noise at the expense of HF headroom. S. -- http://audiopages.googlepages.com |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote: John Byrns wrote: In article , Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. The reason the HF is turned down by the RIAA EQ is to reduce surface noise. No, you have that exactly backwards, the RIAA recording curve reduces the groove amplitude at high frequencies, requiring a complimentary high frequency boost in playback, which increases the effects of surface noise. LPs are essentially a constant velocity system, so higher frequencies can be boosted on record as their amplitude on the record is reducing, and cut back on playback, together with the surface noise. No, No, a thousand times NO, LP's are essentially a constant amplitude system with the high frequency groove amplitude shelved down by approximately 12 dB, LP's are nowhere near a constant velocity system. Viewed as a constant velocity system approximately 38 dB of equalization would have to be applied. 12 dB vs. 38 dB makes LP's essentially a constant amplitude system. Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
"John Byrns" wrote in message ... In article , Patrick Turner wrote: Gerry wrote: What the hell is "bodge"???? Andre will have his answer, but when he or someone else uses the term they mean you have to make the signal from the microphone through to the speaker via vinyl go through a roller coaster ride of "enfrightenment". Why can't they just record the mic signal after amplifying with a linear amp, cutting record with a linear amplitude amp, and having playback with a flat amp? What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. John. You seem to have got your RIAA curves confused. The recording curve actually shelves at LF because this is generally only lateral modulation which would otherwise take up too much physical room on the surface of the disc. On cutting, the HF is increased on record, and reduced on replay to attenuate surface noise. It was a pretty nifty solution, certainly not a bodge. http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...cord_Curve.png and the repro curve at: http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...duce_Curve.png These curves appear in a million textbooks, and date from June 1953. Best regards Iain |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
In article ,
"Iain Churches" wrote: "John Byrns" wrote in message ... What are a few of the reasons? I assume the main reason the RIAA recording curve shelves down the high frequency groove amplitude is because if the high frequencies weren't reduced while cutting the record the groove velocity, and acceleration, at high frequencies would be too much for the playback pickup to cope with. Cutting the high frequency amplitude during recording also would reduce the "pinch" effect. Maybe an expert can tell us the reasons why the high frequency amplitude is shelved down when cutting a record following the RIAA recording curve? The down side is that a "bodge" in the form of a complementary high frequency amplitude boost must be applied during playback, which accentuates the high frequency noise. John. You seem to have got your RIAA curves confused. The recording curve actually shelves at LF because this is generally only lateral modulation which would otherwise take up too much physical room on the surface of the disc. Iain, you are the one that seem to have got your RIAA curves confused. Perhaps your confusion derives from your phobia of equalizers. Read again what I wrote, notice the phrase "groove amplitude", I was speaking of the amplitude that is cut into the groove. What I said is correct, and since you mention the "physical room on the surface of the disc", it is worth mentioning that it is the "amplitude" that determines how much physical room is required to accommodate a given recording on the surface of the disc. The curves you referenced are relative to recorded velocity, not recorded amplitude. I am surprised that you, a recording industry professional, are as confused by this issue as is the average "RAT". Regards, John Byrns -- Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/ |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.opinion
|
|||
|
|||
Intelligence and RIAA
Gerry said: RIAA is a bodge to correct another bodge. What the hell is "bodge"???? It's obviously some bit of Brit slang. I've never heard it before but the meaning is plain. My suggestion is to find a 12-year-old child who earns a B average in school and ask the child to clue you in. -- Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Intelligence and RIAA | Audio Opinions | |||
where to get RIAA test record / "RIAA NOISE" | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Passive RIAA VS feedback RIAA preamp | Vacuum Tubes |