Digitising Vinyls (OT for uk.tech.digital-tv)

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Arny
Krueger
wrote:

"FUL" wrote in message
...


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA amp
designs I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular are *velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals,

If nothing else, I'd be alarmed by the DC offset that would be caused
simply by lowering the stylus into the groove. The vertical displacement
of
the stylus that causes is quite visible! Hate to think how much it would
move the speaker cones if the entire system was dc coupled! :-)

it is in pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce
low frequency AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

FWIW http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/HFN/LP1/KeepInContact.html
might illuminate that a little if people consider the implications of,
say,
Figures 5 and 8.

Great examples!

What also needs to be said is that LPs with signals 0 dB are not uncommon.

Figure 6 shows that records cut with your reference level are precariously
close to simply popping the needle out of the groove in the vertical
direction.

On 12/22/2011 02:13 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/22/2011 01:03 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA amp
designs
I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular
are
*velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals, it is in
pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce low
frequency
AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

Well I wonder where I got the idea that they can accurately reproduce low
frequency down to 50 hz.

I suspect that has something to do with one or more of the following:

(1) Not doing really well-controlled listening comparisons.

(2) Not doing technical measurements and referencing the results to what is
known about audiblity.

All these years I must have been mistaken.

More likely, you believed what you were told way back when.

More likely I believed my ears when I could hear the low frequency notes
made by a double bassoon on a decently recorded and cut lp.

"recursor" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 12/22/2011 02:13 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/22/2011 01:03 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA
amp
designs
I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular
are
*velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals, it is
in
pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce low
frequency
AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

Well I wonder where I got the idea that they can accurately reproduce
low
frequency down to 50 hz.

I suspect that has something to do with one or more of the following:

(1) Not doing really well-controlled listening comparisons.

(2) Not doing technical measurements and referencing the results to what
is
known about audiblity.

All these years I must have been mistaken.

More likely, you believed what you were told way back when.

More likely I believed my ears when I could hear the low frequency notes
made by a double bassoon on a decently recorded and cut lp.


Which begs the question what was your reliable reference standard for making
that determination, and what was the monitoring environment?

It would seem that you are unaware of the kind of bandwidth manipulations
that routinely go into recording low frequency sounds on LPs, especially
those that are perceived to be "decently recorded".

High Fidelity is not about merely hearing instruments but hearing them
reproduced accurately.

I routinely do live sound with a regular Bassoon, and if you knew how high
of a frequency it can be high-passed and still sound like itself...

On 12/22/2011 02:33 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
o.uk...
On 12/22/2011 02:13 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/22/2011 01:03 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA
amp
designs
I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular
are
*velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals, it is
in
pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce low
frequency
AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

Well I wonder where I got the idea that they can accurately reproduce
low
frequency down to 50 hz.

I suspect that has something to do with one or more of the following:

(1) Not doing really well-controlled listening comparisons.

(2) Not doing technical measurements and referencing the results to what
is
known about audiblity.

All these years I must have been mistaken.

More likely, you believed what you were told way back when.

More likely I believed my ears when I could hear the low frequency notes
made by a double bassoon on a decently recorded and cut lp.


Which begs the question what was your reliable reference standard for making
that determination, and what was the monitoring environment?

It would seem that you are unaware of the kind of bandwidth manipulations
that routinely go into recording low frequency sounds on LPs, especially
those that are perceived to be "decently recorded".

High Fidelity is not about merely hearing instruments but hearing them
reproduced accurately.

No **** Sherlock!
I said I believed my ears because I was hearing the low notes of the
double bassoon being accurately reproduced. Jeez some people are so
simple you have to spell everything out for them.

"recursor" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 12/22/2011 02:33 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
o.uk...
On 12/22/2011 02:13 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/22/2011 01:03 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
...


"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA
amp
designs
I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular
are
*velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals, it
is
in
pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce low
frequency
AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

Well I wonder where I got the idea that they can accurately reproduce
low
frequency down to 50 hz.

I suspect that has something to do with one or more of the following:

(1) Not doing really well-controlled listening comparisons.

(2) Not doing technical measurements and referencing the results to
what
is
known about audiblity.

All these years I must have been mistaken.

More likely, you believed what you were told way back when.

More likely I believed my ears when I could hear the low frequency notes
made by a double bassoon on a decently recorded and cut lp.


Which begs the question what was your reliable reference standard for
making
that determination, and what was the monitoring environment?

It would seem that you are unaware of the kind of bandwidth manipulations
that routinely go into recording low frequency sounds on LPs, especially
those that are perceived to be "decently recorded".

High Fidelity is not about merely hearing instruments but hearing them
reproduced accurately.

No **** Sherlock!

Acurate audio reproduction and vinyl can't properly be used in the same
sentence, and that's a scientific fact.

I said I believed my ears because I was hearing the low notes of the
double bassoon being accurately reproduced.

It appears that you said that based on the absence of a reliable standard in
a questionable circumstance for listening.

Jeez some people are so simple you have to spell everything out for them.

Apparently, you still haven't gotten *int*.

On 12/22/2011 03:56 PM, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

snipperty doo doh

I think that is very unlikely. Both the cartridge and most RIAA
amp
designs
I've seen don't pass or sense 'DC'. MM and MC cartridges in
particular
are
*velocity* sensors.

Hey Jim, you really do talk ********...

No, Jim said something that is completely and totally true.

Not only is the LP format inherently incompetent for DC signals, it
is
in
pretty dire circumstances while trying to accurately reproduce low
frequency
AC, which is to say anything below about 100 Hz.

Well I wonder where I got the idea that they can accurately reproduce
low
frequency down to 50 hz.

I suspect that has something to do with one or more of the following:

(1) Not doing really well-controlled listening comparisons.

(2) Not doing technical measurements and referencing the results to
what
is
known about audiblity.

All these years I must have been mistaken.

More likely, you believed what you were told way back when.

More likely I believed my ears when I could hear the low frequency notes
made by a double bassoon on a decently recorded and cut lp.


Which begs the question what was your reliable reference standard for
making
that determination, and what was the monitoring environment?

It would seem that you are unaware of the kind of bandwidth manipulations
that routinely go into recording low frequency sounds on LPs, especially
those that are perceived to be "decently recorded".

High Fidelity is not about merely hearing instruments but hearing them
reproduced accurately.

No **** Sherlock!

Acurate audio reproduction and vinyl can't properly be used in the same
sentence, and that's a scientific fact.


You love the security of your little *scientific facts* don't you. Of
course there is actually no such thing as accurate audio reproduction by
any method since no conceivable recording will ever reproduce exactly
the sound experienced by someone who was actually present at the source.
This is totally obvious to anyone but a complete dork so all your so
called scientific certainties consist of really is your preference for
digital over analogue. That's just your opinion...GEDDIT!!!

In article ,
recursor wrote:
You love the security of your little *scientific facts* don't you. Of
course there is actually no such thing as accurate audio reproduction by
any method since no conceivable recording will ever reproduce exactly
the sound experienced by someone who was actually present at the source.
This is totally obvious to anyone but a complete dork so all your so
called scientific certainties consist of really is your preference for
digital over analogue. That's just your opinion...GEDDIT!!!

Many of us have been involved in live versus recorded sound comparisons.
And it is very possible to fool a lot of the population - even when they
know what's being tried - for some of the time. But absolutely not when
the recording medium is vinyl. Decent analogue tape, yes, but not so good
as pro digital.

It is, of course, impossible to review any recording on vinyl just after
it's been made. As you have admirably proved. Your ears have no memory.

--
*Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere may be happy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:31 +0000, recursor
wrote:

You love the security of your little *scientific facts* don't you. Of
course there is actually no such thing as accurate audio reproduction by
any method since no conceivable recording will ever reproduce exactly
the sound experienced by someone who was actually present at the source.
This is totally obvious to anyone but a complete dork so all your so
called scientific certainties consist of really is your preference for
digital over analogue. That's just your opinion...GEDDIT!!!

You are Ned Ludd, and I claim my five pounds.

d

On 22/12/2011 17:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In [email protected] w.co.uk,
wrote:
You love the security of your little *scientific facts* don't you. Of
course there is actually no such thing as accurate audio reproduction by
any method since no conceivable recording will ever reproduce exactly
the sound experienced by someone who was actually present at the source.
This is totally obvious to anyone but a complete dork so all your so
called scientific certainties consist of really is your preference for
digital over analogue. That's just your opinion...GEDDIT!!!

Many of us have been involved in live versus recorded sound comparisons.
And it is very possible to fool a lot of the population - even when they
know what's being tried - for some of the time. But absolutely not when
the recording medium is vinyl. Decent analogue tape, yes, but not so good
as pro digital.


Well, that's errant nonsense - I've even been to a vinyl sound
comparison at a hifi show. And I don't get out much, at least to that
type of thing. It was actually quite amusing (PT hosted), but that's
another story.

It is, of course, impossible to review any recording on vinyl just after
it's been made. As you have admirably proved. Your ears have no memory.


What on earth are you blathering on about?!

Rob

On 22/12/2011 17:11, Don Pearce wrote:
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:43:31 +0000,
wrote:

You love the security of your little *scientific facts* don't you. Of
course there is actually no such thing as accurate audio reproduction by
any method since no conceivable recording will ever reproduce exactly
the sound experienced by someone who was actually present at the source.
This is totally obvious to anyone but a complete dork so all your so
called scientific certainties consist of really is your preference for
digital over analogue. That's just your opinion...GEDDIT!!!

You are Ned Ludd, and I claim my five pounds.

d

Militant anti-capitalist notable for direct action?

Rob