[sdiy] Nifty Slider/Fader alert

[harrybissell]

Hi Ralph (et al)

I confess to having never had a really high-end vinyl stereo. I did have tube amps etc...
fairly good cartridges (for the home market) and I never ever mistreated my vinyl...

OTOH in the day of high volume production of vinyl... quite a few record pressings
SUCKED, yes ???   Does the "RCA Dynagroove" bring back any memories ???   :^P

Pound for pound and dollar for dollar... the digital format is a step forward for most consumers...  I do not believe that digital is responsible for the dearth of talent that is
prevalent today...  I'd blame the TV... still an analog media at this point.

If we were to do a "double blind" test... it would have to be with representative equipment.

Maybe it would be fair to limit the playing field to x thousand dollars... to shake out the units
that only .001% of listeners would have access to.

I agree that in the only "double blind test" I ever did... vinyl WON !!!  But as I said earlier
I attribute that to the human factor in the process and not inherent limitations in the media.

The first time I heard digital audio it scared the shit out of me. I was at a high end audio place for a demo... and was walking past the speaker, which was dead silent... Just as I passed I heard a
human being suck wind... (which was freaky)... and then launch into a sax solo from the
total silence that preceeded it...

Both Analog and Digital can be very good....

H^) harry

Ralph Karsten wrote:

> Hi Glen,
>
> Not so much a blanket insult (don't know how it got to that point), but:
>
> transistor amplification and enhance the presence of pops and ticks, making them seem a lot bigger then they actually are on the LP. The reason for this is that semiconductors in tandem with what is required to make them linear enough for a hifi rig means a load of negative feedback.
>
> Since there is a quite measurable propogation delay in the circuit, the feedback does not arrive in time to correct the incoming signal. This effect is worsened at higher frequencies, like those where the short-duration ticks and pops reside. This also contributes to a sheen on instruments playing in the higher registers.
>
> Tube equipment, being simpler with similer gain, needs less feedback and so does not do this as badly!
>
> This is not about insults- its about education.
>
> Another problem area is the playback apparatus. Most turntables have magnetic cartridges, which are prone to ringing like any inductive device... For proper playback, even an inexpensive (meaning: under $800) cartridge gets quite a bit pf benefit from being loaded properly. Otherwise the ringing of the cartridge causes enhancement of things like ticks and pops.
>
> If the tone arm is poorly set up, and if it exhibits its own resonance at high frequencies, there will be additional sibilence and ringing effects that also contribute to ticks and pops sounding louder then they should.
>
> There is also a listening preferece, which is much more of what this is about. I do not like the tonality of the recording to have an artifact- I'll take a little background noise over that. Others cannot take any noise but are OK with some harshness as a tradeoff.
>
> Ideally it would be neither, and ultimately someday (or decade from now) digital will provide that. But it is not today, nor will it be next year.
>
> On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 14:26:35 -0400
> Glen <mclilith at charter.net> wrote:
>
> > At 12:57 PM 6/5/04 , Ralph Karsten wrote:
> >
> > >On this subject, it is best not to make two common mistakes that I have seen
> > >in this thread: Just because you mistreated your LPs does not mean the
> > >format is faulty, and just because you use inferior playback techniques (bad
> > >turntable, poor preamplification, godaweful squalid-state amps :)  does not
> > >mean the CDs are better.
> >
> > Howdy Ralph,
> >
> > First, I have LPs that were NEVER mistreated. I have taken them straight
> > out of the brand new packaging, and placed them ever so delicately on my
> > turntable. I then proceeded to play them, and what did I hear?
> >
> > POPPING and CRACKLING that peaked out MUCH LOUDER than the music I was
> > trying to hear underneath it!
> >
> > You can't convince me (or a lot of others) that a lot of vinyl records
> > weren't crap, in this respect.
> >
> > I've tried cleaning them before the 1st play, playing them straight out of
> > the package with no cleaning. I've played them wet, dry, and everywhere in
> > between. (Although wetting helps, it's not a cure.)
> >
> > I absolutely resent being told that my technique was somehow amiss, or that
> > my equipment is crap, if I have any serious displeasure with vinyl records.
> >
> > A solid state amp will not cause this cracking, which originates on the
> > record. Likewise, the quality of my preamp will not generate this
> > disturbance. As for a turntable, I used fairly good quality turntables. Not
> > the best, but not the cheapest either. I've never had the luxury of even
> > hearing a turntable that costs over $1000.00, so I can't say that some
> > exotic turntable wouldn't help with the snap crackle pop.
> >
> > However, I shouldn't have to spend over $1000 just to hear a record played
> > reasonably free from popping and cracking.
> >
> > As flawed as cheap CD players are, even the CHEAPEST CD player doesn't
> > create a disturbance as noticeable as this.
> >
> > You can keep your turntables and vinyl records. I'll gladly suffer through
> > the "horrors" of pop-and-click-free listening with my humble CD player. It
> > may have limitations, but at least I can depend on actually hearing the
> > music when I purchase an album on CD.
> >
> >
> > Finally, if you don't like my attitude, then next time don't make a blanket
> > insult toward everyone who complains about vinyl records, and accuse them
> > of damaging their records.
> >
> >
> > later,
> > Glen Berry