Sound maximizer

[JayDC]

Leo , q te pasa ? es un bon nene ...nos da buenos momentos con sus post no ?
Y lo sabes , tiene las formulas, sabe todo , y sobre todo , tambien habla con Al , entonces ....

¿que paso mi amigos? moderador gritó no le gusta. así que usted sabe.

[maniman]

No he entendido muy bien de que va la discusión , por que pelean ? mi medico dice que la gente que se agarra cabreos acaba senil !!!!

[Nickou]

cabiamos de nombre al foro
ahora se llama la socediad secreta de los puentes de corte

[d]

What?

[flozki]

hei
if you talk about levels. please...never talk about db's
and please stay in english otherwise i start posting in "swiss german" or swahili
+2 +6 whatever. dB is relative. so tell us +6 dB's at 7cm/s reference level. for example

depends where you set your 0dB.
so grab a test record with a certain and well known reference level
lets say 7cm/s . and then you set your meters to that level.

now you can compare. this is the same shit the holy man which produced these cutters somewhere in germany alsways wrote. "you can cut +12 dBs" wow! and all the boys where impressed.

and then i guess its somewhere in the AES books. a nice table about frequency vs cutting levels (in cm/s) in realtion to diameter and speed.
so you find out very easy the top of what is possible.if you go higher. i can sound damn good for certain music. for other it doesnt. but you wont loose the cutter normally.

another quick and dirty judgement , which works nice for me:
is the cutter current meter and
if you have the temperature of the coils.
vinylium ultracut has additional clipping lamps for the amps and current peak indication. very handy.
so you can see from these indicators that it might be too loud.
if your amps are in good shape and protection is set up correctly it is almost impossible to burn a head quickly.
most heads die from weak glue. cracks (through thermo cycles) in the coil insulation and then after a longer time they burn..
or from high frequency oscillation in the amps which often you can not see on the meters..

for the typical west european cutting studio the average time of live in the 80ies for an sx74 was 1-2 years and then they went bad or of specs. nowadays i know people who are much more carefull and they run heads for 10 years or so. (ok they might dont have same tuff quality checks anymore)

[opcode66]

That's what Al Grundy told me. Straight from his lips to my ears. I was video taping the session. I can post the video clip with him saying this. Debate it with him. Neumann was not involved in the developement of the RIAA EQ Curve. And a lot of other cutterheads at the time had their resonant frequency much higher.

If Al Grundy said that to you ... yes ,we will be very happy if you post the video

Sure, I'll listen the video recordings as I work over the next couple days. I have two full days worth of training on video. I've been told this video is priceless by a number of people. I will find the clip where I ask if the two were related and Al clearly says no. I will also find a few relevant clips where he warns about highs and levels. After extraction I'll post to youtube and link here. Might take me a day or two to find that exact moment in approximately 10 hours of training.

Will it matter? You will simply say he or I am wrong. Or, you will tell me how else I'm wrong. So, this is going to be pretty much a useless exercise on my part. But, I'll do it.

[opcode66]

Leo , q te pasa ? es un bon nene ...nos da buenos momentos con sus post no ?
Y lo sabes , tiene las formulas, sabe todo , y sobre todo , tambien habla con Al , entonces ....

¿que paso mi amigos? moderador gritó no le gusta. así que usted sabe.

No need to speak about me in another language. I didn't contact the moderator. He acted on his own. He contacted me too.

[Phinster]

I don't think who ever came up with the RIAA curve in the 50's anticipated today's music, do you?

We never had 'maximizers' in the 60's and 70's and stuff sounded ok didn't it?

[Nickou]

I don't think who ever came up with the RIAA curve in the 50's anticipated today's music, do you?

We never had 'maximizers' in the 60's and 70's and stuff sounded ok didn't it?

yes , but at this time the maximizer was the musician

now it is protools ...

[JayDC]

[More nonsense from Jay deleted by Aussie0zborn]

STOP BEING A NAZI..


how is saying that opticode needs to be less defensive, and maybe someone will help him get to his next level someting to edit?.. thats a life tip..

[leo gonzalez]

hei
if you talk about levels. please...never talk about db's
and please stay in english otherwise i start posting in "swiss german" or swahili
+2 +6 whatever. dB is relative. so tell us +6 dB's at 7cm/s reference level. for example

flo is right. +2VU = +6db or whatever... with no reference to a recording standard... riaa, nab...

correct me if im wrong, the nab for monophonic recording is 7cm/s but for stereophonic is 5 cm/s or somehow -2/3db lower (might be wrong)... so yes, i'd guess if i'd cut with that reference in mind and just say im cutting at +6 or whatever, then, haha, im cutting hotter than u (@ 7cm's) without getting audible distortion on the record...

judging for the link he posted, looks like he might be setting his reference level to 1.228V RMS. maybe he has calibrated without a reference disc and is matching that value from the output of his phone-pre.

Opcode, looks like you made this something personal, but you can't touch all this subjects, resonance, VU, RIAA, high levels, without any proper context. im not saying you are wrong, but you have to work on how you present your ideas, that's all.

Im still intrigued though about what you wanted to say about resonances and RIAA cause i think there's some nice discussion there to go on.

In the westrex 3a-d there are resonant freqs @ around 8 and 12K that are, i think, considered second-order harmonics. I wouldn't say they are somehow related to their main resonace freq at around 1K, its just that the mechanics on the head at those frequencies are a bit cluncky! for me it's been difficult to understand this because almost all the playback cartriges are funny from around 10k region on.... at least the ones i've done these tests with. so it is very difficult to tell exactly what happens there just by playing back. visually its something that could be done but its very difficult to measure with the microscope.

When i started, just by listening to the feedback monitor, i blamed the feedback coils for this, but as i went on thinking about it, looks like drive and feedback don't couple together very nicely on that region putting them directly out of phase. And as a rookie, i went on and boosted that region like crazy and off course it was easier to find distortion on some of my early recordings.

So when you come up and throw out there on this topic the resonance issue on some heads on the high frequencies, then don't expect me to take it lightly, haha!

from what i've heard, there is one head that has it's main resonant at wound 10k and it would be an early grampian mono head back from the 78s days. correct me there please if im wrong.

some ortofons maybe...

but feedback heads with resonant freqs (fs right) at high fres??? mechanically damped heads (non feedback) do have resonances might have dip and boosts on the high yes...

[JayDC]

[Deleted by Aussie0zborn]

f u oz..

leo is a friend, and len is a master.. niko is te golden child.. respect..

[opcode66]

I have an Ultimate Analog Test Tone reference disc. Not the NAB disc. Sadly, I am still looking for a copy. 1 KC sine wave at 7 cm/second lateral in phase mono.

One of the first steps in callibration of the SAL or VG amp rack is to place this record on the turntable, switch to the PU setting on the rack and start playing the track. You then tweak the pots freely accessible on the front of the rack to make sure that the pickup amplification is correct. You adjust until your meters read 0 VU. But, how do your meters know what is 0 VU. They were callibrated elsewhere without the NAB record.

When I got mine I double checked and fine tuned the callibration. Which is why that chart I referenced is helpful. If your meters are off then the NAB or Ultimate tone records are not an absolute reference point because the amp rack has adjustments for the pickup amplification. Thus, I started with insuring the readings of my meters. I suppose some people are happy with their meters out of the box.

As most meters do, mine have an attenuator for each individual meter to be callibrated. I double checked the callibration of my meters themselves prior to callibrating the lathe. I used a digital device that a studio tech friend of mine has. I forget the name of it. It can generates and measures tones and can do acoustical tests as well as check cables, etc. My meters are callibrated to show 0 VU at +4 db.

Once callibrated I could also use the meters to tell where the amplitude knob on my function generator needs to be roughly when producing either the 1K or 5K tones for the rest of the amp rack callibration procedure.

I have to get Al's ok before I post any video. I'm certainly not going to post all of the 8 hours or so that I have. I have found the clip in question. It is his helper who actually explains that the 1k res and 1k zero line of riaa are a coincidence and Al agrees with him. I also clipped together many explanations of res in the head, riaa, levels and so on. He laces everything with stories so I hope I can post it soon. He's a really neat guy.

[JayDC]

please get his ok for all footage..

I'm more interested in the stories segway to information

i'll never get to meet him, or anything like that so having 8hrs of al to watch would be very cool..

It can generates and measures tones and can do acoustical tests

rta?

[concretecowboy71]

I also have several hours of video footage. A lot of dis assembly of the lathe. I would be willing to share if Al said it was OK.

If someone were to start a You Tube channel devoted to lathe info, I would donate my footage.

I think it is important for this information to be available in the future.

[JayDC]

i think its a good idea, he is not getting any younger.. kinna a legacy thing..

[maniman]

If someone were to start a You Tube channel devoted to lathe info, I would donate my footage.
I think it is important for this information to be available in the future.

that would be amazing , I'm dying to see these (and other lathe related) videos.

Which think is the predisposition of Al Grundy to make public this footage? , that can be relatively possible ?

PD : Sorry for the language lapsus , I did not understand that discussing and try to ask Nickou in our lang , I do not think language was changed to hide anything from anyone (but as say , I didnt understand the discussion at all) , I'm honest, I have nothing to fear from the moderators or anyone in general , you who would have to fear my English.

[d]

Hi,

if there will be youtube channel divoted to disk recording would be amazing. And when the pros are in those vids that would be a goldmine for future.

Information that is sitting on cd's doesn't help a bit

Dov

[Chris]

As most meters do, mine have an attenuator for each individual meter to be callibrated. I double checked the callibration of my meters themselves prior to callibrating the lathe. I used a digital device that a studio tech friend of mine has. I forget the name of it. It can generates and measures tones and can do acoustical tests as well as check cables, etc. My meters are callibrated to show 0 VU at +4 db.

Just to chime in here, 4dB means absolutely nothing.....

4dBu means something, and 4dBV means something else, they are given with reference to a voltage value. So saying 0VU = +4dB means nothing, as 4dBu is given with a different voltage level to dBV, and a whole load of other dB reference standards, so if you calibrated to 4dBV, you will have different voltage value to if you had calibrated at 4dBu.

I think that is the point people are making here, if you are going to list values, it's best to do it with the correct reference so people know what you are talking about, it's the only way for everyone to know each other is on the right track

[concretecowboy71]

My solution to the whole issue of metering may be low-tech, but it works for me. But since there are so many standards, I needed something that worked in my shop.

I spend a lot of time listening to records and often look for a record that is similar to a project I am working on.

I watch my meters as I play the record and then see how my project works at levels that are similar.

Not rocket science, but it has worked for me and I have not blown anything up.

I think record cutters are in a good position because the "volume wars" don't really apply to us much. Nobody really plays records on the radio anymore and I don't cut dance records so I don't have to go for levels that other cutter might have to.

My answer to the original question about maximizers...find a better set of tools for the job. I was always told that a maximizer is just a preset EQ. Really not very helpful.