EEV blog nonsense ?

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Chris Jones wrote:

On 30/08/2016 13:06, ~misfit~ wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet F Murtz wrote:
axolotyl wrote:
On 27-Aug-16 8:37 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Computer Nerd Kev wrote:


** Yes - unscripted presentations on video are usually tedious
and often
painful to watch. In that respect, Dave is not much worse than
many others.


It's simply that his presentation style is more love or hate than
most. I always suspected that it appealed more to Americans, as
they more often
tend towards exaggeration more than other major English speaking
cultures.
For me the result
is that I can quite enjoy similar videos by Mike Harrison (mikes
electric
stuff), but I just can't hang in there with D. Jones.



** Maybe you would prefer John Ward:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib7Dd92mGRQ&list=PLVsHvs2Suqmr7z65w-5AbUSUctHmC4IQO&index=2

Perhaps this guy

http://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/restoring-a-1949-tv-set/

Thought she was going to wear the table and the bottom of the radio
out. She seems to like that soddering.
I have only watched 10 minute so far but will get back to it.

After hearing about him talking about the 'toob' and 'tooner' I knew
it was only a matter of time until he got to 'soddering'. :-/


I am disappointed that they don't make the same mistake when
pronouncing "flux".

Heh!
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 1/09/2016 11:38 AM, ~misfit~ wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 30/08/2016 1:00 PM, ~misfit~ wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0000 (UTC), not@telling.you.invalid
(Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
Mike's vids seem quite good. Shame though, saying 'leds' for LEDs
is a pet peeve of mine.

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.

I'm off to listen to some L.E.D Zeppelin.

Was just thinking about finding my Zepplin CDs last night actually
when I upgraded the amplification on my stereo. Funny how an
improvement in sound quality makes you want to listen to old
favourites.

**Depends. Many older recordings were so badly mastered, that
improvements in playback equipment reveals more flaws. Almost any
pop/rock recordings fall into this category. Things improved in the
1970s. Particularly with bands like Toto, Supertramp, ELO, Pink Floyd
and others, where much care was taken with mastering.

You're right. Increasingly I'm finding that I'm listening to well-mastered
and produced music over (some) old favourites. I was just explaining this to
a friend the other day, saying that the improvements I've made to the stereo
don't translate equally across all CDs. Some are still great music but they
actually sound worse (comparatively) with a better system.

**Sounds about right.

[Anecdote] Back in the early 1980s, I was asked to supply an amplifier
to CBS for their cassette tape duplicating plant. Rather unwisely,
they purchased a pair of these for their QC lab:

http://bobbyshred.baberuthband.co.uk/infinity/rs1.5.html

A very nice speaker for it's time, but with a sting in the tail. The
impedance at bass frequencies fell below 2 Ohms. I supplied a suitable
amplifier that could deal with the speaker (which I knew very well)
for evaluation. It was rejected. Apparently, their system revealed
far too many flaws in their cassette tapes. A month later, I had a
call requesting that I supply CBS with the amplifier. They had tried
a dozen of so amps and none could deal with the Infinity speakers.

Heh! That's a nasty characteristic for a speaker.

**It's big brother dipped to around 0.7 Ohms:

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/579infinity/#pfhmtdcHbCDP1KkH.97

Speaking of quasi-ribbon tweeters a couple of years back I picked up a small
Philips home theatre setup (LX700
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=philips+LX700 ). Not because I wanted a
small home theatre but for the price I paid (~NZ$50) I got five dipole
'ribbon' tweeters out of it. Since then I've bought a couple more of the
speaker sets from people who blew up the amplifier (it suffers from
inadequate heatsinking on a couple of parts, mainly in its SMPS).

The tweeters sound great - rare earth magnets have got so much more powerful
since those EMIT tweeters were made)

**I hate to burst your bubble, but the EMITs have ALWAYS used rare earth
magnets. Early EMITs used samarium cobalt magnets, front and back. Later
variants used samarium cobalt on the front and moulded ceramic magnets
on the rear.


but I didn't finish any project with

them - yet! (Never say never.) My biggest issue is with the woodwork for
home made speakers. My cheap home handyman rip tablesaw isn't accurate
enough for cutting larger panels square. Also I recently bought the first
pair of floorstanders I've ever owned that I think sound better than any I
could make.

However I have a bookshelf speaker project I want to finish using those
tweeters and four 50w 3" Philips mid-bass units a side. I've always liked
the idea of spreading the cone area across multiple drivers to increase
response times and minimise frontal area / baffle step diffraction. That
should be doable as the woodwork will all be small pieces. I still haven't
decided if I'm going to use the tweeters as dipoles or close the backs, or
how many tweeters to use on each side.

**Dipoles are a PITA in most rooms.



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Chris wrote:

On 29/08/2016 1:13 PM, axolotyl wrote:
On 27-Aug-16 8:37 PM, Phil Allison wrote:
Computer Nerd Kev wrote:


** Yes - unscripted presentations on video are usually tedious and
often
painful to watch. In that respect, Dave is not much worse than
many others.


It's simply that his presentation style is more love or hate than
most. I always suspected that it appealed more to Americans, as
they more often
tend towards exaggeration more than other major English speaking
cultures.
For me the result
is that I can quite enjoy similar videos by Mike Harrison (mikes
electric
stuff), but I just can't hang in there with D. Jones.



** Maybe you would prefer John Ward:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ib7Dd92mGRQ&list=PLVsHvs2Suqmr7z65w-5AbUSUctHmC4IQO&index=2



.... Phil




Perhaps this guy

http://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/restoring-a-1949-tv-set/

What, are you all misogynists?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmotkjMSKnI

Thanks. I'll check out more of her videos and decide whether to subscribe.
Looks good so far.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

 

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 30/08/2016 1:00 PM, ~misfit~ wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0000 (UTC), not@telling.you.invalid
(Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
Mike's vids seem quite good. Shame though, saying 'leds' for LEDs
is a pet peeve of mine.

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.

I'm off to listen to some L.E.D Zeppelin.

Was just thinking about finding my Zepplin CDs last night actually
when I upgraded the amplification on my stereo. Funny how an
improvement in sound quality makes you want to listen to old
favourites.

**Depends. Many older recordings were so badly mastered, that
improvements in playback equipment reveals more flaws. Almost any
pop/rock recordings fall into this category. Things improved in the
1970s. Particularly with bands like Toto, Supertramp, ELO, Pink Floyd
and others, where much care was taken with mastering.

You're right. Increasingly I'm finding that I'm listening to well-mastered
and produced music over (some) old favourites. I was just explaining this to
a friend the other day, saying that the improvements I've made to the stereo
don't translate equally across all CDs. Some are still great music but they
actually sound worse (comparatively) with a better system.

Back in the early 1980s, I was asked to supply an amplifier
to CBS for their cassette tape duplicating plant. Rather unwisely,
they purchased a pair of these for their QC lab:

http://bobbyshred.baberuthband.co.uk/infinity/rs1.5.html

A very nice speaker for it's time, but with a sting in the tail. The
impedance at bass frequencies fell below 2 Ohms. I supplied a suitable
amplifier that could deal with the speaker (which I knew very well)
for evaluation. It was rejected. Apparently, their system revealed
far too many flaws in their cassette tapes. A month later, I had a
call requesting that I supply CBS with the amplifier. They had tried
a dozen of so amps and none could deal with the Infinity speakers.

Heh! That's a nasty characteristic for a speaker.

Speaking of quasi-ribbon tweeters a couple of years back I picked up a small
Philips home theatre setup (LX700
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=philips+LX700 ). Not because I wanted a
small home theatre but for the price I paid (~NZ$50) I got five dipole
'ribbon' tweeters out of it. Since then I've bought a couple more of the
speaker sets from people who blew up the amplifier (it suffers from
inadequate heatsinking on a couple of parts, mainly in its SMPS).

The tweeters sound great - rare earth magnets have got so much more powerful
since those EMIT tweeters were made) but I didn't finish any project with
them - yet! (Never say never.) My biggest issue is with the woodwork for
home made speakers. My cheap home handyman rip tablesaw isn't accurate
enough for cutting larger panels square. Also I recently bought the first
pair of floorstanders I've ever owned that I think sound better than any I
could make.

However I have a bookshelf speaker project I want to finish using those
tweeters and four 50w 3" Philips mid-bass units a side. I've always liked
the idea of spreading the cone area across multiple drivers to increase
response times and minimise frontal area / baffle step diffraction. That
should be doable as the woodwork will all be small pieces. I still haven't
decided if I'm going to use the tweeters as dipoles or close the backs, or
how many tweeters to use on each side.

Cheers,
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

 

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 1/09/2016 11:38 AM, ~misfit~ wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 30/08/2016 1:00 PM, ~misfit~ wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0000 (UTC), not@telling.you.invalid
(Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
Mike's vids seem quite good. Shame though, saying 'leds' for
LEDs is a pet peeve of mine.

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.

I'm off to listen to some L.E.D Zeppelin.

Was just thinking about finding my Zepplin CDs last night actually
when I upgraded the amplification on my stereo. Funny how an
improvement in sound quality makes you want to listen to old
favourites.

**Depends. Many older recordings were so badly mastered, that
improvements in playback equipment reveals more flaws. Almost any
pop/rock recordings fall into this category. Things improved in the
1970s. Particularly with bands like Toto, Supertramp, ELO, Pink
Floyd and others, where much care was taken with mastering.

You're right. Increasingly I'm finding that I'm listening to
well-mastered and produced music over (some) old favourites. I was
just explaining this to a friend the other day, saying that the
improvements I've made to the stereo don't translate equally across
all CDs. Some are still great music but they actually sound worse
(comparatively) with a better system.

**Sounds about right.

Yeah. However there are a few old favourites that keep sounding better,
thank the gods.

Back in the early 1980s, I was asked to supply an
amplifier to CBS for their cassette tape duplicating plant. Rather
unwisely, they purchased a pair of these for their QC lab:

http://bobbyshred.baberuthband.co.uk/infinity/rs1.5.html

A very nice speaker for it's time, but with a sting in the tail. The
impedance at bass frequencies fell below 2 Ohms. I supplied a
suitable amplifier that could deal with the speaker (which I knew
very well) for evaluation. It was rejected. Apparently, their
system revealed far too many flaws in their cassette tapes. A month
later, I had a call requesting that I supply CBS with the
amplifier. They had tried a dozen of so amps and none could deal
with the Infinity speakers.

Heh! That's a nasty characteristic for a speaker.

**It's big brother dipped to around 0.7 Ohms:

Eeek!

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/579infinity/#pfhmtdcHbCDP1KkH.97


Speaking of quasi-ribbon tweeters a couple of years back I picked up
a small Philips home theatre setup (LX700
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=philips+LX700 ). Not because I
wanted a small home theatre but for the price I paid (~NZ$50) I got
five dipole 'ribbon' tweeters out of it. Since then I've bought a
couple more of the speaker sets from people who blew up the
amplifier (it suffers from inadequate heatsinking on a couple of
parts, mainly in its SMPS). The tweeters sound great - rare earth magnets
have got so much more
powerful since those EMIT tweeters were made)

**I hate to burst your bubble, but the EMITs have ALWAYS used rare

Don't worry my bubble was burst many years ago. ;-)

earth magnets. Early EMITs used samarium cobalt magnets, front and
back. Later variants used samarium cobalt on the front and moulded
ceramic magnets on the rear.

Yeah I'm aware of that but materials science has come a very long way very
quickly in the last couple of decades and the neodymium bar magnets used in
these Philips tweeters are crazy powerful (and this is coming from someone
who's familiar with strong magnets, having pulled quite a few HDDs apart and
had the blood-blisters to prove it). They're only about 5mm square and one
of them ripped a small screwdriver out of my hand from 5cm away. I thought
it must have gone through the Kapton-esque membrane but was surprised to see
that the magnet decellerated the screwdriver even faster than it accelerated
it. and it hadn't touched the diaphragm.

but I didn't finish any project with
them - yet! (Never say never.) My biggest issue is with the woodwork
for home made speakers. My cheap home handyman rip tablesaw isn't
accurate enough for cutting larger panels square. Also I recently
bought the first pair of floorstanders I've ever owned that I think
sound better than any I could make.

However I have a bookshelf speaker project I want to finish using
those tweeters and four 50w 3" Philips mid-bass units a side. I've
always liked the idea of spreading the cone area across multiple
drivers to increase response times and minimise frontal area /
baffle step diffraction. That should be doable as the woodwork will
all be small pieces. I still haven't decided if I'm going to use the
tweeters as dipoles or close the backs, or how many tweeters to use
on each side.

**Dipoles are a PITA in most rooms.

So I've noticed. However I have a partition between my dining area and
kitchen where I'm currently sitting two of the LX700 centre speakers on end
(as psuedo-MTM boxes) as a stop-gap measure and they sound quite good in
both rooms. Obviously the mids are less loud in the kitchen but just having
dipole tweeters makes the music quite listenable to from behind - if you
know what I mean. Also there are few reflections in the dining room as the
speakers aren't near walls. I'm considering custom building speakers to go
there.

Cheers,
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

 

On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 13:51:36 +1200, "~misfit~"
<shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:00:13 +1200, "~misfit~"
shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0000 (UTC), not@telling.you.invalid
(Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
Mike's vids seem quite good. Shame though, saying 'leds' for LEDs
is a pet peeve of mine.

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.

I'm off to listen to some L.E.D Zeppelin.

Was just thinking about finding my Zepplin CDs last night actually
when I upgraded the amplification on my stereo. Funny how an
improvement in sound quality makes you want to listen to old
favourites.

There are pros and cons to doing that,

Yeah, see my previous reply in this thread. I've been dissapointed with a
couple of CDs lately that I've always really liked but, with mostly
transapent playback gear and plenty of power sound lacking.

but I generally agree. I was
never particularly impressed with the sound quality of Led Zepp's
recordings though, TBH. Page's guitar in particular sounds thin and
reedy. OTOH, my go-to LZ album is Physical Graffiti... love it.

Physical Graffiti *is* great. (Damn now I'm going to have to dig that out
and have a listen. ;-) )

I'm overdue for a listen too, maybe later this arvo...

What gives me the shits with many modern recordings is that they're so
bass-heavy, which on my system has me running for the tone controls
because the house is about to shake apart... a lot of music (new and
old) actually sucks on a good system.

I freakin' hate that too! Especially as I've been mostly listening using my
'new' amplification using a very basic preamp that only has a volume
control. Luckilly there are very few albums that I like that were made later
than the early 90s so I've just been ignoring those for now.

I'm pleased though that at least now it *is* the house and wondows that
suffer rather than my speakers. I recently bought a pair of Sony SSK70EDs
that handle pretty much everything I can throw at them, sound clean and
clear and image like nothing I've heard costing under $10K.

Nice, I am not familiar with those but they look the goods and have
positive reviews.

Now I just wish
I'd managed to get some SSK90EDs. These are very under-rated speakers. Sony
made them in a vain effort to illustrate to the public the improvements that
SACDs bought to the table over standard CDs. Unfortunately for Sony the
public were moving in the opposite direction, going for pocket-sized music
and 'fidelity' so the speakers were discontinued (except in Japan where they
still make a piano finish version of the SSK range).

The stuff available only in Japan is mind blowing, both new and old
gear.

 

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:

On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 13:51:36 +1200, "~misfit~"
shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:00:13 +1200, "~misfit~"
shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 22:37:55 +0000 (UTC), not@telling.you.invalid
(Computer Nerd Kev) wrote:
~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
Mike's vids seem quite good. Shame though, saying 'leds' for
LEDs is a pet peeve of mine.

I'm pretty sure we've been here before.

I'm off to listen to some L.E.D Zeppelin.

Was just thinking about finding my Zepplin CDs last night actually
when I upgraded the amplification on my stereo. Funny how an
improvement in sound quality makes you want to listen to old
favourites.

There are pros and cons to doing that,

Yeah, see my previous reply in this thread. I've been dissapointed
with a couple of CDs lately that I've always really liked but, with
mostly transapent playback gear and plenty of power sound lacking.

but I generally agree. I was
never particularly impressed with the sound quality of Led Zepp's
recordings though, TBH. Page's guitar in particular sounds thin and
reedy. OTOH, my go-to LZ album is Physical Graffiti... love it.

Physical Graffiti *is* great. (Damn now I'm going to have to dig
that out and have a listen. ;-) )

I'm overdue for a listen too, maybe later this arvo...

What gives me the shits with many modern recordings is that they're
so bass-heavy, which on my system has me running for the tone
controls because the house is about to shake apart... a lot of
music (new and old) actually sucks on a good system.

I freakin' hate that too! Especially as I've been mostly listening
using my 'new' amplification using a very basic preamp that only has
a volume control. Luckilly there are very few albums that I like
that were made later than the early 90s so I've just been ignoring
those for now.

I'm pleased though that at least now it *is* the house and wondows
that suffer rather than my speakers. I recently bought a pair of
Sony SSK70EDs that handle pretty much everything I can throw at
them, sound clean and clear and image like nothing I've heard
costing under $10K.

Nice, I am not familiar with those but they look the goods and have
positive reviews.

They're by far the best speakers I've heard - and that's saying something
as, before I became an invalid I was reasonably well off and audio was my
passion.

I had a good look indside them when I turned the drivers 180ş after I bought
them (second-hand). They're very thick MDF with the interior coated in a
black rubberised sealant stuff.. Also there are shaped braces inside a bit
like the frames you'd see in a boat only cut from 25mm MDF.

They're basically two speakers using the same cabinet. The top is a ~25l
acoustic suspension enclosure with the (sealed back) 25mm carbon dome
tweeter and one brace above the 160mm kevlar cone mid / bass driver filled
with dacron 'wool'. There's a thick MDF seperator then the bottom chamber is
bass reflex system for the 160mm kevlar reinforced paper cone woofer. The 18
dB / octave cross-over is mounted on the bottom of the partition and there
are three braces in the lower part and it's lined with 40mm thick foam (as
well as the black coating). They're almost like a large 2-way and integrated
subwooferand they're *very* well made.

I saw a set of 2 x K90EDs, 2 x K30EDs and another CNK10ED listed for auction
last week with a start price of $1K. The 90s are the same as the 70s only
taller with a second (sub)woofer and go down a few Hz lower. The numbers
[70, 90 etc.] are volume in litres. It didn't make it's reserve but if they
weren't ~600km away I would have been sorely tempted to get my credit card
out, then if the 90s are as good as I think they will be, selling my 70s to
recoup some of the cost.

Heh! That said I'm quite happy with the SS-K70EDs.

Now I just wish
I'd managed to get some SSK90EDs. These are very under-rated
speakers. Sony made them in a vain effort to illustrate to the
public the improvements that SACDs bought to the table over standard
CDs. Unfortunately for Sony the public were moving in the opposite
direction, going for pocket-sized music and 'fidelity' so the
speakers were discontinued (except in Japan where they still make a
piano finish version of the SSK range).

The stuff available only in Japan is mind blowing, both new and old
gear.

I know right? There must be a lot of very serious audiophiles in Japan
that's for sure.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)