"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message


If you are adjusting the tone controls for this reason, then you have,
a priori, a bad recording! I prefer to avoid those, and I have never
found tone controls to be of any use in that regard. YMMV.

Agreed, tone controls are pretty blunt instruments for correcting the tonal
quality of recordings.

OTOH a good 5 or 7 band parametric equalizer or better yet a 24,000 point
FFT-based equalizer can be in the right hands, a pretty fine tool. Even 30
band graphic equalizers can be pretty darn useful.

I have a prefab 24k point FFT equalization curve I call "Anti-SM-57". It's
pretty much the inverse of Shure's published curve for that mic. It's
amazing how many amateur and mediocre professional recordings it seems to be
able to transform into listenable events, almost magically.

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
I have a prefab 24k point FFT equalization curve I call "Anti-
SM-57". It's pretty much the inverse of Shure's published curve for that
mic. It's amazing how many amateur and mediocre professional recordings it
seems to be able to transform into listenable events, almost magically.

And yet that unfortunate transducer (and its' cousin, the '58) are
the "industry standard". Which is why I find it dificult to generate
much respect for the pop-music "industry".

I was at the AES in LA when the "Wall of Sound" paper was
presented (by Ron Wickersham?) They revealed that they
were unable to use any of the Shure mics because they couldn't
find any that were consistent enough to use as a differential pair.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:57:41 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 19:12:29 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Fair enough, so long as there is a bypass option. Since I never use
them, I don't want to pay for them - and a well-made one puts about
$200 on the retail cost of the amplifier, mostly due to the rotary
controls.

You have a mythical idea of the cost of controls ( even well-made ones ).

I have more than 30 years of experience in the design and manufacture
of high quality industrial electronics.

Hmmm - well ok but I have 30 years of experience in the design and manufacture of
pro-audio.

Withe kind of mark-ups common to my industry, that bass and treble circuit would
have to cost about $60 in materials to translate to a $200 retail cost.

Given that even conductive plastic pots can be had for a few dollars each - what
had you in mind ?

Penny & Giles rotary faders, like I use in my own passive controller,
with ruthenium-tipped Pickering relays providing the tone bypass
circuit.

Nice - but serious overkill.

Graham

"Jiyang Chen" wrote in message
...
Beginner question, but the speakers that I am looking at is rated at
250
watts per channel. Do I need to get an amplifier that is higher than
this watts rating, or is 250 watts the maximum I should look for? The
speakers are Athena AS-f2.

Can anyone recommend a good $450 or under amp for these speakers ? I
already have the CD player.


I've been looking into some A/v receivers, specifically the Harman
Kardon AVR 330. It says that it'll deliver 55 watts into Surround front
left and right, and 70 watts into Stereo.

What's the difference between plugging the AS-f2 speakers into either
one of the slots?

"Pooh Bear" wrote in message


Do you recall the 'Academy Curve' applied to film sound tracks ?

Yer.

A recording engineer I knew many years ago similarly had his own
'anti Academy Curve' filter.

Fogures.

His film sound tracks received a number of awards ! ;-)


Probably not a coincidence.

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message


If you are adjusting the tone controls for this reason, then you have,
a priori, a bad recording! I prefer to avoid those, and I have never
found tone controls to be of any use in that regard. YMMV.

Agreed, tone controls are pretty blunt instruments for correcting the tonal
quality of recordings.

OTOH a good 5 or 7 band parametric equalizer or better yet a 24,000 point
FFT-based equalizer can be in the right hands, a pretty fine tool. Even 30
band graphic equalizers can be pretty darn useful.

I have a prefab 24k point FFT equalization curve I call "Anti-SM-57". It's
pretty much the inverse of Shure's published curve for that mic. It's
amazing how many amateur and mediocre professional recordings it seems to be
able to transform into listenable events, almost magically.

Do you recall the 'Academy Curve' applied to film sound tracks ?

A recording engineer I knew many years ago similarly had his own 'anti Academy
Curve' filter.

His film sound tracks received a number of awards ! ;-)


Graham

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote ...
I have a prefab 24k point FFT equalization curve I call "Anti-
SM-57". It's pretty much the inverse of Shure's published curve for that
mic. It's amazing how many amateur and mediocre professional recordings it
seems to be able to transform into listenable events, almost magically.

And yet that unfortunate transducer (and its' cousin, the '58) are
the "industry standard". Which is why I find it dificult to generate
much respect for the pop-music "industry".

May I suggest that you reserve your disdain more for Shure Brothers and their
apparent inability to make any better mic as a 'standard' ?

There's no shortage of 'pop-music' sound engineers who loathe the SM57/8 along
with its endless promotion. The 57 isn't even robust !

SM57s & 58s are bought mainly by ppl who listen to audio folklore rather than
their ears.

Graham

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 02:06:10 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:57:41 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 19:12:29 +0100, Pooh Bear
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Fair enough, so long as there is a bypass option. Since I never use
them, I don't want to pay for them - and a well-made one puts about
$200 on the retail cost of the amplifier, mostly due to the rotary
controls.

You have a mythical idea of the cost of controls ( even well-made ones ).

I have more than 30 years of experience in the design and manufacture
of high quality industrial electronics.

Hmmm - well ok but I have 30 years of experience in the design and manufacture of
pro-audio.

Withe kind of mark-ups common to my industry, that bass and treble circuit would
have to cost about $60 in materials to translate to a $200 retail cost.

Given that even conductive plastic pots can be had for a few dollars each - what
had you in mind ?

Penny & Giles rotary faders, like I use in my own passive controller,
with ruthenium-tipped Pickering relays providing the tone bypass
circuit.

Nice - but serious overkill.

In the context of a 'high-end' pre-amplifier which could retail for
several thousand dollars? No, just honest use of the best available
components. Check what's *really* inside those megabuck preamps, and
it's usually about thirty to fifty bucks worth of Alps pots and
gold-plated switches - if you're lucky............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering