R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24   Go Down

Author Topic: IC's kill music  (Read 115131 times)

Terry Demol

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #315 on: July 16, 2005, 10:32:47 PM »

thermionic wrote on Wed, 13 July 2005 17:04

DC wrote:
Quote:


Douglas Self is the worst possible example to bring into this thread. He is the ultimate objectiveist, and believes in measurement. His books are full of AP plots and discussions of how to lower distortions in every stage....



Sorry about that... Self is a real party pooper...just imagine what the discussion groups would be like if we adhered to Self's protocol...

BTW, Self is not the only objectivist that advocates Class B operation in power amps - funny that... He must be using a *fair* amount of forward bias to get away from the worst regions of switching distortion,




To the contrary, Self's optimum OP bias is quite low, usually
less than 200mA depending on OP devices and resistive component
of their emitter impedance.

We have tested the popular Self OP topologies such as CFP and
experimented with various OP bias currents. In this case his
theory doesn't necessarily correlate to sonic results. More
bias sounds better, IOW cleaner, more dynamic, less grain, just
better in every way.  

Quote:




but on the whole I get the impression that many of his ilk tend to view pure Class A in power amps as a scenario where the cure for the problem (i.e. efficiency well below 20% and excess heat build-up) is worst than the symptoms...

I haven't taken the time to study Self's power amp designs - is he an advocate of feed-forward error correction?




No. That was invented by Malcolm Hawksford. Many people nowadays
use variations of this linearisation scheme, including Halcro.

Quote:



I believe a certain well-known Canadian amp OEM use FFEC, and consequently performance on paper looks good, without upsetting "Friends of the Earth".




FF EC is a very good alternative to the usual huge loop
feedback scenario. It is very fast and much better at adressing
Xover dist than global FB. However it can be tricky to get
working right.

[/quote]
Logged

JGreenslade

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 824
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #316 on: July 17, 2005, 02:09:25 PM »

Terry Demol wrote on Sun, 17 July 2005 03:32

thermionic wrote on Wed, 13 July 2005 17:04

DC wrote:
Quote:


Douglas Self is the worst possible example to bring into this thread. He is the ultimate objectiveist, and believes in measurement. His books are full of AP plots and discussions of how to lower distortions in every stage....



He must be using a *fair* amount of forward bias to get away from the worst regions of switching distortion,




To the contrary, Self's optimum OP bias is quite low, usually
less than 200mA depending on OP devices and resistive component
of their emitter impedance.



We have a question of semantics here - if a typical studio amp runs on +/- 75v rails with 200ma bias, by modern "efficient" amp standards, that would equate to what I would consider a *fair* amount of forward bias, not the "contrary" to Self’s implementation.


Quote:



I haven't taken the time to study Self's power amp designs - is he an advocate of feed-forward error correction?


Quote:



No. That was invented by Malcolm Hawksford. Many people nowadays
use variations of this linearisation scheme, including Halcro.




Note the use of "advocate", as opposed to inventor... I look forward to reading Hawksford's articles in AES journals btw.

edit: I knew that statement didn't feel quite right...

Considering these posts stay in the archive indefinitely, we might as well make the effort to ensure accuracy - "Feed Forward Error Correction" was originally proposed by Harold Black in 1928, scroll down to the pdf in this link: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/6365/0/0/9 98/?SQ=983d6ecea6171685460a1f7ce0eac469

Justin
Logged
Audio is a vocational affliction

"there is no "homeopathic" effect in bits and bytes." - HansP

micguy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #317 on: July 20, 2005, 01:40:36 PM »

Since it seems every other person in the audio world has put their two cents in this thread, why not me?

OP-amps are a class of circuit topology. They can be made from Vacuum tubes (yes, some early ones were), discrete transistors, or transistors on the same die. Every black vinyl disk ever made (analog, and therefore obviously "better sounding" Wink  than a digital CD) passed through an op-amp driving the cutter head.

Discrete transistors (BJT's and FETs) are made using the same processes that are use to make the ones on I.C.'s - they're not necessarily better (or even different)

If you look at "high end" discrete op-amps - like the Jensen ones, they go to great lengths to couple them thermally - makes them work better, by potting them in epoxy. If you want even better thermal coupling, you put them on the same die. Oh wait, that's an I.C.

Anyone who says that Tubes are always better than transistors, or discrete is better than op-amps, needs to first understand that the world isn't that neat - it's not 3 simple classes of devices.

Also, making statements like "but I'm glad that the best ones were made on discrete desks, because I like listening to them better" clearly has no idea what they're talking about - how do you even know what desk something was mixed on?, Was the mastering was done with all discrete circuitry, or were there evil op-amps involved?

An awful lot of energy can be wasted patting yourself on the back about how you like this versus that for some arcane technical difference. If you'd just listen to the music, and take the excess energy you have and put it to some useful purpose (donate the time you'd spend arguing about this or the money you'd otherwise spend on next month's preamp to charity), the world would be a lot better place.
Logged

vernier

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 809
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #318 on: July 20, 2005, 02:56:26 PM »

But I like the sound of old records. And many CD (reissues) as well. They capture the great old tube sound, stored for eternity (thanx to digital).
Logged

Andy Simpson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 714
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #319 on: July 20, 2005, 03:09:07 PM »

vernier wrote on Wed, 20 July 2005 19:56

But I like the sound of old records. And many CD (reissues) as well. They capture the great old tube sound, stored for eternity (thanx to digital).


And some of the capture the great old music sound too....Wink

Andy
Logged

vernier

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 809
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #320 on: July 20, 2005, 03:54:40 PM »

Yep, all of it ..great stuff. And good that its available for reference. Margarine makers have real butter as an example, artificial sweetener chemists too ..can't ever lose sight of what they're trying to achieve.
Logged

magicchord

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #321 on: July 20, 2005, 04:08:22 PM »

...I only listen to acoustical recordings on my vintage windup reproducer...
Logged
Patrick Bryant - Magicchord Music BMI

zmix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2828
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #322 on: July 21, 2005, 12:46:47 AM »

andy_simpson wrote on Wed, 20 July 2005 15:09

vernier wrote on Wed, 20 July 2005 19:56

But I like the sound of old records. And many CD (reissues) as well. They capture the great old tube sound, stored for eternity (thanx to digital).


And some of the capture the great old music sound too....Wink

Andy

Laughing  Laughing  Laughing

now back to the moron-a-thon....

maxdimario

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3811
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #323 on: July 21, 2005, 04:16:42 AM »

Quote:

but I'm glad that the best ones were made on discrete desks, because I like listening to them better" clearly has no idea what they're talking about - how do you even know what desk something was mixed on?, Was the mastering was done with all discrete circuitry, or were there evil op-amps involved?



Simple, all records made before 1977 or so had discrete desks (which were higher quality overall).

If you look at the way professional equipment was built before the late seventies you'll see that the quality was much higher, the sound was more natural.

op-amp desks came about because of the new, relatively cheap and small IC technology.

SSL desks took advantage of the miniaturization and cost-effectiveness of IC's to build a parametric eq, dynamics section and automation in EACH channel.

Just years before this would not have been possible with that size/pricetag.

The thing is that those IC's were not built for audio.

We are not talking about analog devices chips here but cheap dirty op-amps.

and zmix, instead of calling people morons because they like the sound of tube recordings (even mastered on cd), maybe you should take the discussion to a higher level and tell us what you like about the sound of records mixed through tlo7X and 553X VCA-equipped mixers.
Please tell us what makes that kind of signal path so endearing and superior to discrete solid state or tubes.

Maybe this would resolve some of the misunderstandings or illuminate the ones who have doubts on the issue.

Logged

zmix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2828
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #324 on: July 21, 2005, 11:00:51 AM »

Sorry, - 21 pages of fallacious argument, unsupported conjecture and dogmatically expressed opinion is a "moron-a-thon" no matter what the topic is.

Johnny B

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1134
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #325 on: July 21, 2005, 11:50:07 AM »


Is it not possible for people to rise to a more professional level so that they can express their differences and opinions without the ad hominem name-calling.

Calling someone a name simply because one disagrees with them adds nothing to the discussion and does nothing to explore "why" someone may feel they way they do. People usually feel the way they do based upon their particular circumstances and individual experiences, perhaps making enquiries into those areas would aid in gaining a greater depth of understanding and advance the discussion forward.

For example, one tech or the other could have burned someone really badly and helped ruin a given project. That would seem to be a perfectly logical reason for feeling strongly about a given tech and then expressing it in a short-hand fashion without revealing all the underlying nuances. Again, finding out what's underneath a person's statement can help us understand the "why" aspect. Another example could be where someone got burned on some tech that was a complete waste of money, again, a pretty good reason for being upset and expressing it in a short-hand way.

Sometimes more questions and less name-calling is the best course on these forums.  

As always,
YMMV  
Logged
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain; as far as they are certain,
they do not refer to reality."
---Albert Einstein---

I'm also uncertain about everything.

zmix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2828
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #326 on: July 21, 2005, 01:09:52 PM »

Please, - I never called anyone a moron because they like the sound of tubes.

In fact, I never called anyone here a moron at all.

In calling this thread a "moron-a-thon" it is not my intention to insult anyone. This is a pun I used to give my impression of the marathon-like excess of this thread.

I would like to personally thank Max Dimario and Johnny B for their hypervigilance and immediate response to rebuke the notion that 21 pages of regurgitated retoric, opining inconclusively about and fetishizing all things discrete might be characterized as moronic.

carry on...



t(h)ik

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 998
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #327 on: July 21, 2005, 01:21:28 PM »

All the world's a moron-a-thon

We are merely players

Retards and purveyors

Each the other's idiot

Outside the rusty cage

<you know the bassline from here>
Logged
I used to be self effacing, but I couldn't even do that right....
www.pmtstudios.com

vernier

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 809
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #328 on: July 21, 2005, 01:26:05 PM »

It's fact that different era's of equipment effect the sound of recordings. It's irreversible and unchangable, so get used to it.
Logged

John Ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3028
Re: IC's kill music
« Reply #329 on: July 21, 2005, 01:58:46 PM »

I haven't read the whole thread but I will,,

The thread title it's self though is just crazy IMO. When I think of what may or may not be killing music, there is a huge huge list of stuff that comes to mind and almost none of it has anything to do what so ever with which pile of shit someone picks up to record with.

To me, the human stuff means way way more. I'll go back to this Idea, that we are all sick of but makes a ton of sense.

The right Guy/Gal can make an absolutely astoundingly magnificent recording with a Roland 2480 and a pile of china mics. Period. Another guy/gal can make an un-listenable pile of garbage on the finest recording rig that has ever existed. Period..

Having said all that, I agree that in many cases, class A designs of old have a wonderfully clear and pretty sound. I was over to a friends place here in Lansing the other week and he was getting a session together. The drums were coming up through his 80??? Neve mixer and his big monitors and when he faded the over heads up, I about fell out of my chair. A pair of C-12's through that neve and those monitors is just amazing to me..


SO WHAT!! I can't afford to work like that very often so I need to make things sound as good as I can without it. Thankfully, when I'm moved by a piece of music, the audio amps it went through is the last thing I think of.

People are killing music Not IC's.
Logged
"Transformation is no easy trick: It's what art promises and usually doesn't deliver." Garrison Keillor

 
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 17 queries.