[jakdedert]

Bob Church wrote:

BTW, don't feel bad about putting electrolytics in your loudspeakers.
Radio Shack, one of the greatest names in hi fi, used to do it. Caveat
emptor! Are yours mounted externally in sockets to facilitate testing
and replacement? How often do you recommend that your customers check?

Now you're just trolling....

jak

[Richard Crowley]

"jakdedert" wrote ...
Bob Church wrote:

BTW, don't feel bad about putting electrolytics in your loudspeakers.
Radio Shack, one of the greatest names in hi fi, used to do it. Caveat
emptor! Are yours mounted externally in sockets to facilitate testing
and replacement? How often do you recommend that your customers check?

Now you're just trolling....

No, he was trolling a ways back.
But he's better than the average troller.
Radium could take some lessons.

[Bob Church]

jakdedert wrote:
Serge Auckland wrote:
"jakdedert" wrote in message
...
Bob Church wrote:
snip

When I made my digital recordings, they seemed to be LP quality.
Now that I've listened more carefully, I think they're better than
listening to the same LPs through an analog receiver and $200 AKG
phones 20 years ago. I'm interested in why the iMic is so good.

For example, the iMic has revealed that what I always assumed was a
faint electrical hum from my turntable is really mechanical noise.
It makes sense: a motor turning a platter with rubber wheels.
Raising the load from the nominal 47k ohms to 34k ohms may have
cleaned up the bass response so I could hear it more clearly.

If you have a turntable that contains 'rubber wheels', then that's
much of your problem. Those 'rubber [idler] wheels' are only used in
the crappiest turntables, and are famous for adding mechanical noise
to the playback.

The Dual and PE turntables that used them eventually abandoned the
system.


jak

You must mean crappy turntables like the EMT 930, or the Thorens TD124
or perhaps the Garrard 301 and 401, all very crappy.

S.



That would be correct. Idler wheel drive was and is a bad idea, no
matter who did it, and no matter how high the quality of the associated
mechanics.

In addition, the OP states he's had his particular TT for 40 years, and
it's never needed service. I'd submit that it needed service at least
30 years ago.

Rubber wears out, dries out and becomes hard. Startup inertia causes
minute flat spots or divots in the idler wheel surface as the motor
spins against the rubber. Those irregularities transmit to the platter
as rumble. Making a sufficiently heavy platter to completely damp out
that noise is impossible. Although the mass may mitigate noise
transmission to some degree, getting that heavy platter spinning up to
speed increases the stress on the idler wheel system, leading to more of
the above.

To operate anywhere near original spec', the idler must be renewed
periodically.

Belt drive is inherently superior. That's not to say there weren't some
crappy belt-drive models out there. However, the mechanism is simpler
and mechanically much more straightforward. Noise transmission from the
drive mechanics are nearly eliminated, due to the isolation of the motor
to platter interface.

jak

I've pursued what you said. The rubber wheel turns at 198 rpm. I
haven't heard any noise cycle that slow.

The motor is a 4-pole synchronous on a rubber suspension. With it
running free, a microphone picked up nothing until I touched it to the
metal plate near the suspension. Way down near the noise floor of the
microphone came a hum like a transformer.

That's the sound I would hear before the cue placed the stylus on the
LP, ever since the turntable was new. I thought my cartridge leads were
picking up electrical hum.

Once the stylus is on the LP, it's so faint that I didn't notice it
until I listened carefully between songs the other day. Heard that way,
it has a more mechanical sound.

My BIL got a direct drive about the time I got my Elac Miracord 50 HII.
At first I envied him because his turntable was so small and light.
Mine has held up much better.

[Richard Crowley]

"Bob Church" wrote ...
I've pursued what you said. The rubber wheel turns at 198 rpm. I haven't
heard any noise cycle that slow.

The problem with rubber pucks is not necessarily any
once-around noise. It is the way they so efficiently
conduct higher frequency vibration (which you are
perceiving as mechanical "hum" from the motor).
Not to mention their tendency to slip unless all
conditions are optimal.

[jakdedert]

Richard Crowley wrote:
"Bob Church" wrote ...
I've pursued what you said. The rubber wheel turns at 198 rpm. I haven't
heard any noise cycle that slow.

The problem with rubber pucks is not necessarily any
once-around noise. It is the way they so efficiently
conduct higher frequency vibration (which you are
perceiving as mechanical "hum" from the motor).
Not to mention their tendency to slip unless all
conditions are optimal.


In addition, they produce noise from the effects of that slippage; the
small 'chunks' taken out of the tire each time it slips. Those get
transmitted to the platter.

No matter. It's an old turntable. If the OP were really knowledgeable,
he would have replaced it long ago...either the idler, or the entire
turntable.

jak

[Bob Church]

Mr.T wrote:
"Bob Church" wrote in message
...
After software equalization, you could have 16 bits' worth of fidelity
at 20 Hz and 19 bits' worth from 1kHz up. In practice, I imagine the
output of cartridges is lower, and the noise floor may be higher, so you
won't end up with a signal worth 16 bits. But it seems to show that if
you have a good 24-bit A/D converter, you can do a good job with the
output of a phono without deemphasizing first.

Yep, when someone comes out with a cryogenically cooled A/D that can
actually resolve a full 24 bits of accurate information.
However finding any vinyl record with more than about 12 or 13 bits of
actual information is next to impossible, or worse. So the point is rather
moot. Current high quality soundcards that can provide about 19 bits are
probably adequate, but the question remains why you would bother. An RIAA
pre-amp is not that difficult or expensive, especially when you only need to
output around 2V peak for most soundcards anyway. Overload margins and high
voltage designs are irrelevant if the soundcard is simply overloaded
instead.

MrT.


I had CDs of most of my record collection when lightning knocked out all
my receivers. I hadn't used my turntable much in recent years, so I put
it in a cupboard.

I had no way to hear or replace a four-record set the Shakespeare
Recording Society made in 1963. I could have bought a preamp and a usb
converter, but that would have been a big investment to transfer four
beat-up LPs. With iMic I got a device that would continue to be useful
for mic input, line input, line output, and headphone output.

As for Griffin, I guess they realized that more and more people with LPs
had no preamp. (Receivers these days can fail in a flash. After you
buy another you realize it has no phono input.) I guess Griffin found
it more practical to go to a 24-bit converter than to add a jack and
other components.

It's only since I dropped in here that I realize it probably doesn't
perform quite as well as a good preamp. If I get my tracking force
right, I might still enjoy better LP listening than I've had since I
bought my present cartridge, about 1980.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 13, 1:21 pm, Bob Church wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 12, 6:53 am, Bob Church wrote:
I agree that mechanical oscillations can affect a circuit like
inductance and capacitance, but the behavior I observed
was not equivalent to a simple L C R circuit.

I didn't say it was a "simple LRC circuit," did I? Why apply
your assumption to what I am saying?

Sorry, I was misled by your description,

No, you were mislead by what is now you obvious
misunderstanding of the domain.

"It's complex, yes, but still quite straightforward..."

According to OED, "complex" means
complicated and not easy to understand.

Apparently, you have a real attention span when it comes
to reading, because OED has a number of definitons
for "complex"

From Websters, for example:

complex adj: 1 a: composed of two or more
parts

I guess, then that your oversimplified description of
"LCR" apparently puts it beyond your grasp, because
it's complex.

"Straightforward" means uncomplicated and easy
to understand.

And it's straightforward to all those familiar with
domain of loudspeaker physics. This is a domain
that, it is becoming increasingly apparent, you do
not circulate in.

Are you talking through your hat?

No, but you're listening through yours, it appears.

or all headphones
should be fed at 120 ohms (220 before 1997).

There you go again: the phrase "fed at 120 ohms" is
technically nonsensical. It might lead one to believe
you are largely unfamiliar with the technical terms you
bandy about so.

Sorry, I didn't realize I was talking over your head.

You weren't: you were talking over your own.

Please find us definitive articles, texts or others that
use the term "fed at 120 ohms" or similar that supports
your use of the obscure term. I, for example, just did a
search of the entire AES archive, and the phrase
"fed at * ohms appears nowhere over the last half century
of publication. Horowitz and Hill never once use the term.
It's not in Beranek, MaClachlin, Thiele, Small, Benson.

It's a technically nonsensical term.

BTW, don't feel bad about putting electrolytics in your
loudspeakers. Radio Shack, one of the greatest
names in hi fi, used to do it.

And Kef, Bowers and Wilkins, Quad and many others
did and still do.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 13, 4:01 pm, Bob Church wrote:
As for Griffin, I guess they realized that more and more people with LPs
had no preamp. (Receivers these days can fail in a flash. After you
buy another you realize it has no phono input.) I guess Griffin found
it more practical to go to a 24-bit converter than to add a jack and
other components.

It's not a 24-bit converter. It might put out 24 bits of data, but
it has nowhere near 24 bits of resolution. There are a number
of online tyest that indicate that it has a resolution equivalent
to about 13 or so bits. It's noise floor is well above 16 bit
CD noise floor.

It's only since I dropped in here that I realize it probably doesn't
perform quite as well as a good preamp.

As an unequalized phono preamp, it would appear to
perform FAR worse.

If I get my tracking force
right, I might still enjoy better LP listening than I've had since I
bought my present cartridge, about 1980.

Well, sorry to say, if you have had the mistracking issue
you've mentioned, it's probably too late. Mistracking is
basically the sound resulting from the stylus losing
contact with the groove and, quite literally, crashing back
in to it. The result can often be irreparable damage to the
LP.

[Mr.T]

"Bob Church" wrote in message
.. .
Sorry, I didn't realize I was talking over your head.

In a reply to Dick Pierce, this has to be the funniest thing I've seen in
ages! :-) :-)

MrT.

[Mr.T]

"Bob Church" wrote in message
.. .
BTW, don't feel bad about putting electrolytics in your loudspeakers.
Radio Shack, one of the greatest names in hi fi, used to do it.

Now we know you are a clueless troll!

MrT

[Mr.T]

"Bob Church" wrote in message
.. .

I had CDs of most of my record collection when lightning knocked out all
my receivers. I hadn't used my turntable much in recent years, so I put
it in a cupboard.

I had no way to hear or replace a four-record set the Shakespeare
Recording Society made in 1963. I could have bought a preamp and a usb
converter, but that would have been a big investment to transfer four
beat-up LPs.

Actually the Behringer UCA202 and PP400 are also low cost solutions that
outperform the iMic. There are plenty of others for not much more.


As for Griffin, I guess they realized that more and more people with LPs
had no preamp. (Receivers these days can fail in a flash. After you
buy another you realize it has no phono input.) I guess Griffin found
it more practical to go to a 24-bit converter than to add a jack and
other components.

Marginally cheaper for them at least.


It's only since I dropped in here that I realize it probably doesn't
perform quite as well as a good preamp. If I get my tracking force
right, I might still enjoy better LP listening than I've had since I
bought my present cartridge, about 1980.

Yep, always safer to err on the high side of the tracking weight range than
the low side. If you heard mis-tracking you should have immediately
increased the tracking weight, or replaced the cartridge if necessary.
What damage you have permanently done to your records is unknown, but you
can bet there is some.

MrT.

[Arny Krueger]

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u

"Bob Church" wrote in message
.. .

Sorry, I didn't realize I was talking over your head.

In a reply to Dick Pierce, this has to be the funniest
thing I've seen in ages! :-) :-)


Agreed.

However, it is even a little funny as addressed to mere mortals such as
yourself and I. ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message

"Bob Church" wrote in message
...
After software equalization, you could have 16 bits'
worth of fidelity at 20 Hz and 19 bits' worth from 1kHz
up. In practice, I imagine the output of cartridges is
lower, and the noise floor may be higher, so you won't
end up with a signal worth 16 bits. But it seems to
show that if you have a good 24-bit A/D converter, you
can do a good job with the output of a phono without
deemphasizing first.

Yep, when someone comes out with a cryogenically cooled
A/D that can actually resolve a full 24 bits of accurate
information.

I don't think that cryogenics are required, just very low impedances.

However finding any vinyl record with more than about 12
or 13 bits of actual information is next to impossible,
or worse.

Agreed.

So the point is rather moot. Current high
quality soundcards that can provide about 19 bits are
probably adequate, but the question remains why you would
bother.

Because they can cost less than $200 ? ;-)

An RIAA pre-amp is not that difficult or
expensive, especially when you only need to output around
2V peak for most soundcards anyway. Overload margins and
high voltage designs are irrelevant if the soundcard is
simply overloaded instead.

Agreed.

[Arny Krueger]

"Bob Church" wrote in message

ilaboo wrote:
seems that this would be a neat adapter
probable need some audio amp in adapter
i think there is a real need for something like this
any comments?
tia
pter


About a year ago I got a Griffin iMic for about $30 to
make computer files of my LPs. For fidelity and ease of
use it left nothing for me to desire.

It's the size of a pocket watch, with a USB lead instead
of a watch chain. It has 1/8" stereo jacks and came with
a Y RCA adapter. It has a line/mic level switch, which
means it could convert audio from many kinds of sources.

It also converts USB digital to analog audio. It is most
valuable to me for a use I did not anticipate: listening
to computer audio files. The iMic provides better detail
than my computer's audio circuitry or any of the CD
players I've owned.


Here's a technical report showing the measured performance of an iMic:

http://learjeff.net/RMAA/Griffin%20iMic.htm

Summary - it is 5 or more dB down at 20 Hz and 20 kHz and has about 70 dB
dynamic range. The slopes are relatively gentle, so these roll-offs intrude
on the more critical portions of the audible range. Its dynamic range and
frequency response is so poor that it might degrade a LP transcription made
through it.

For a real-world comparison, here is the measured performance of the
Behringer UCA 202 (costs $10.00 less!)

http://www.birotechnology.com/soundc..._line-line.htm

Summary -

It basically has +/- 0.1 dB response over all but the extremes of the
audible range, Record/play dynamic range is almost 90 dB.

Truely very nearly CD quality. Unlikely to degrade a LP transcription made
through it, even with SOTA turntable, cartrdige, and phono preamp.

[Richard Crowley]

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
Here's a technical report showing the measured performance of an iMic:

http://learjeff.net/RMAA/Griffin%20iMic.htm

Summary - it is 5 or more dB down at 20 Hz and 20 kHz and has about 70 dB
dynamic range. The slopes are relatively gentle, so these roll-offs
intrude on the more critical portions of the audible range. Its dynamic
range and frequency response is so poor that it might degrade a LP
transcription made through it.

For a real-world comparison, here is the measured performance of the
Behringer UCA 202 (costs $10.00 less!)

http://www.birotechnology.com/soundc..._line-line.htm

Summary -

It basically has +/- 0.1 dB response over all but the extremes of the
audible range, Record/play dynamic range is almost 90 dB.

Truely very nearly CD quality. Unlikely to degrade a LP transcription
made through it, even with SOTA turntable, cartrdige, and phono preamp.


Thanks, Arny. That confirms the notion that Griffin makes
little plastic computer adapters, cables and gadgets, some
of which involve audio (but not very well).

While Behringer (even at the low end of many people's ranking
of audio brands) actually makes *audio equipment* some of
which happens to attach to computers.

It will be fascinating to see Mr. Church's defense of his iGadget
after that.

[Mr.T]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
Yep, when someone comes out with a cryogenically cooled
A/D that can actually resolve a full 24 bits of accurate
information.

I don't think that cryogenics are required, just very low impedances.

Or maybe both.
Liquid Nitrogen cooled pre-amps are already made for use by the scientific
community.


So the point is rather moot. Current high
quality soundcards that can provide about 19 bits are
probably adequate, but the question remains why you would
bother.

Because they can cost less than $200 ? ;-)


So does a perfectly adequate souncard/USB adapter *and* RIAA pre-amp for
recording vinyl.
Personally I see NO real benefit of doing RIAA in software, only drawbacks.

Of course additional EQ changes for non-RIAA curves, such as old 78's can
work OK IMO, an RIAA pre-amp gets you into the ball park at least.

MrT.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 15, 2:35 am, "Mr.T" MrT@home wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

. ..

Yep, when someone comes out with a cryogenically cooled
A/D that can actually resolve a full 24 bits of accurate
information.

I don't think that cryogenics are required, just very low impedances.

Or maybe both.
Liquid Nitrogen cooled pre-amps are already made for use by the
scientific community.

In most cases because there is not the option of very low
impedance or there are other sources of noise that are
not directly related to electrical impedance per se. For
example, the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite
took great pains to use liquid helium cooled detectors
because it was already looking for a signal emitted by
something VERY cold to begin with: the universe, and
it was surrounded by little bits of relatively hot stuff, like
the rest of the satellite, the earth, the sun, etc.

Of course additional EQ changes for non-RIAA curves,
such as old 78's can work OK IMO, an RIAA pre-amp
gets you into the ball park at least.

And before someone starts arguing that you can't do that
because of the "added phase shift," these people should
recall (or learn, as the case may be) that these EQ functions
are all minimum phase, which means that by their very
nature, there is a unique phase response not only for
each EQ curve but each EQ curve error, and the reciprocal
correcting frequency response has a corresponding and
reciprocal phase. In other words, if applying standard RIAA
to an old record results in a frequency and phase response
error, applying the frequency response correction WILL apply
the required phase response correction.

[Arny Krueger]

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
Yep, when someone comes out with a cryogenically cooled
A/D that can actually resolve a full 24 bits of accurate
information.

I don't think that cryogenics are required, just very
low impedances.

Or maybe both.
Liquid Nitrogen cooled pre-amps are already made for use
by the scientific community.


So the point is rather moot. Current high
quality soundcards that can provide about 19 bits are
probably adequate, but the question remains why you
would bother.

Because they can cost less than $200 ? ;-)

So does a perfectly adequate souncard/USB adapter *and*
RIAA pre-amp for recording vinyl.

A more straight-forward path.

Personally I see NO real benefit of doing RIAA in
software, only drawbacks.

Agreed.

Of course additional EQ changes for non-RIAA curves, such
as old 78's can work OK IMO, an RIAA pre-amp gets you
into the ball park at least.

You can always adjust a RIAA preamp into the equalization you need with an
equalizer.

[Mr.T]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
Of course additional EQ changes for non-RIAA curves, such
as old 78's can work OK IMO, an RIAA pre-amp gets you
into the ball park at least.

You can always adjust a RIAA preamp into the equalization you need with an
equalizer.

Yes, but doing it in software is usually easier and often better than an
analog equaliser for smaller changes though.
But whatever works :-)

MrT.

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:19:22 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:

Chris Hornbeck inter alia in
rec.audio.techk2f9t3tda4tfcop0lsmq9tgtha2o0f1d6s @4ax.com:

needs to have a flat magnitude response into a load defined
as 47K Ohm and some (few as possible) hundred pF. Do the
math and be afraid; be very... etc.

I've lost the original web page reference for these gifs, (anybody?)
but for example;- (but without context:- model? measurement? - )

Shure M97 recommended 47K 250pF.gif
http://i31.tinypic.com/aosw86.gif
Shure M97 loaded at 47K + 100pF.gif
http://i27.tinypic.com/fkxnd3.gif
Shure M97 loading at 68K + 100pF.gif
http://i28.tinypic.com/333lvyb.gif

I did the maths on this some time ago now. The effect of various
loadings on a V15iii is here

http://81.174.169.10/odds/v15ii/catridge.html


d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Ross Matheson]

Matt Ion notes in
. org:

Or how about just a USB turntable?
http://www.thinkgeek.com/electronics/audio/90a0/

Or, announced Mar 12, Sony's (1st?) take ... :
(bundled with "Sound Forge Audio Studio LE"!)
http://tinyurl.com/2he9od

Further links within. (Not so impressed with 0.25% WF, though!)
[It's just an aside ... ;=})]

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:56:46 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:

(Don Pearce) writes

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:19:22 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:

Chris Hornbeck inter alia in
rec.audio.techk2f9t3tda4tfcop0lsmq9tgtha2o0f1d6s @4ax.com:

needs to have a flat magnitude response into a load defined
as 47K Ohm and some (few as possible) hundred pF. Do the
math and be afraid; be very... etc.

I've lost the original web page reference for these gifs, (anybody?)
but for example;- (but without context:- model? measurement? - )

Shure M97 recommended 47K 250pF.gif
http://i31.tinypic.com/aosw86.gif
Shure M97 loaded at 47K + 100pF.gif
http://i27.tinypic.com/fkxnd3.gif
Shure M97 loading at 68K + 100pF.gif
http://i28.tinypic.com/333lvyb.gif

I did the maths on this some time ago now. The effect of various
loadings on a V15iii is here

http://81.174.169.10/odds/v15ii/catridge.html

Thanks;- I was horrified to learn last night that a friend just threw a iii
out because he'd been 'told' that styli were no longer available! But ...

Your link brings:
==================
Web Server Error Report:
Server Error: 501 Not Implemented

No RPM for this combination of URL and method

/odds/v15ii/catridge.html
==================
(and so also for iii - )

I have another friend with a iii, so am still interested!

Sorry about that - I flashed a new set of firmware into my router the
other day and hadn't reinstated the DMZ. It should work now, and the
proper address is:

http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

There is also one for the v15V - just substitute V for the iii.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Ross Matheson]

Chris Hornbeck inter alia in
rec.audio.techk2f9t3tda4tfcop0lsmq9tgtha2o0f1d6s@ 4ax.com:

needs to have a flat magnitude response into a load defined
as 47K Ohm and some (few as possible) hundred pF. Do the
math and be afraid; be very... etc.

I've lost the original web page reference for these gifs, (anybody?)
but for example;- (but without context:- model? measurement? - )

Shure M97 recommended 47K 250pF.gif
http://i31.tinypic.com/aosw86.gif
Shure M97 loaded at 47K + 100pF.gif
http://i27.tinypic.com/fkxnd3.gif
Shure M97 loading at 68K + 100pF.gif
http://i28.tinypic.com/333lvyb.gif
--
Ross
[When I get a (broke!) replacement N97HE, I'll be trying the last one ... !]

[Ross Matheson]

(Don Pearce) writes

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 22:19:22 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:

Chris Hornbeck inter alia in
rec.audio.techk2f9t3tda4tfcop0lsmq9tgtha2o0f1d6s @4ax.com:

needs to have a flat magnitude response into a load defined
as 47K Ohm and some (few as possible) hundred pF. Do the
math and be afraid; be very... etc.

I've lost the original web page reference for these gifs, (anybody?)
but for example;- (but without context:- model? measurement? - )

Shure M97 recommended 47K 250pF.gif
http://i31.tinypic.com/aosw86.gif
Shure M97 loaded at 47K + 100pF.gif
http://i27.tinypic.com/fkxnd3.gif
Shure M97 loading at 68K + 100pF.gif
http://i28.tinypic.com/333lvyb.gif

I did the maths on this some time ago now. The effect of various
loadings on a V15iii is here

http://81.174.169.10/odds/v15ii/catridge.html

Thanks;- I was horrified to learn last night that a friend just threw a iii
out because he'd been 'told' that styli were no longer available! But ...

Your link brings:
==================
Web Server Error Report:
Server Error: 501 Not Implemented

No RPM for this combination of URL and method

/odds/v15ii/catridge.html
==================
(and so also for iii - )

I have another friend with a iii, so am still interested!
--
rdm

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:50:22 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:

(Don Pearce) in
:

http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

Still Error 404 just yet.

really? It works fine from here. try later

d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:07:06 +1200, Ross Matheson
wrote:


http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

Still Error 404 just yet.

really? It works fine from here. try later

Yep. I can get http://81.174.169.10/odds/ now,
and even http://81.174.169.10/ but not the above!

OK, http://81.174.169.10/odds/v15iii/cartridge.html is fine! Ta!

I'm obviously not awake yet! I've added a link to the table on the
home page.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Ross Matheson]

(Don Pearce) in
:

http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

Still Error 404 just yet.

[Ross Matheson]

(Don Pearce) in
:

http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

Still Error 404 just yet.

really? It works fine from here. try later

Yep. I can get http://81.174.169.10/odds/ now,
and even http://81.174.169.10/ but not the above!

[Ross Matheson]

http://81.174.169.10/v15iii/cartridge.html

Still Error 404 just yet.

really? It works fine from here. try later

Yep. I can get http://81.174.169.10/odds/ now,
and even http://81.174.169.10/ but not the above!

OK, http://81.174.169.10/odds/v15iii/cartridge.html is fine! Ta!

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 05:35:17 GMT, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

Input signals to
the phono equalizer, besides being pre-equalized at 20dB per
decade ("6dB per octave") are also slew-rate boosted by the
phono cartridge's velocity response of *another* 20dB per decade.

Two week time's-run-out penalty for trivia fans.

Points remain for March Madness explanation of error...

(Extreme Geekiness quotient points *will not* be added;
we promise.) Yeah, right,





O-Keley Do-kely Neighbor. Points for a correct explanation
of the error will be awarded, but cannot be applied to
make PSU win retroactively. Is that fair enough?

Jeez, tough crowd.

Chris Hornbeck