Jump to content

Travis In Austin

Moderators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    12522

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Travis In Austin

    acoustically transparent screens

    in Home Theater

    Posted · Edited by dwilawyer

     

    We simply love our Seymour AT screen. 

     

    • It has incredible resolution
    • The fabric never shows (at about 12 feet away ... it is 130" true image width, not diagonal)
    • It's quite bright (we project with all lights off)
    • It has an Aspect Ratio of 2.35:1, which is immersive (engulfing!), yet 1.85 looks good, as does 2.2 (Todd-AO, and other such processes), 2.39 (newer Panavision), and even 2.76 (Ultra Panavision 70 and Camera 65)
    • There is no normally noticeable sound degradation.  Our center is behind the screen (modified Belle Klipsch).  Because of this, we were able to place the screen at the perfect height.  One of the members of the forum (Hendrick? Hendricks?) asked a Klipsch tech to measure how much comparative high frequency transmission loss there was with the Seymour, and, as I remember, there was a 1.5 dB loss only at the very top of the frequency range.  We use Audyssey room and speaker EQ, and ran the calibration with the screen down (in front of the center), and Audyssey compensated for the loss very well indeed.  We select either Audyssey Flat or Audyssey Reference, whichever sounds best with the film we are running, choosing before guests arrive.    

     

    It was Bill Hendrix, but he didn't have a "Klipsch tech" measure it, it was was Roy Delgado in Hope, in the chamber.  Roy ran it to see what changes would be needed on the EQ for the center speaker and Roy said it was the best he every measured for any screen.

     

    Here is Bill's original post on it, I will get you a link to the threads on it here in a second.

     

    Edit:  Here is one of the threads he discussed the measurements in  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/107386-acoustically-transparent-screens/?hl=screen#entry1185150

     

    Edit 2:  Here is the thread regarding his set up, photos, etc.  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/95489-klipschorn-jubilee-and-pro-cinema-theater-pics/?hl=screen

     

    Travis

     

     

    Call Chris Seymour

    http://www.seymourav.com/

    I have an AT screen  in front of JubScala center and KPT-884 sub. Roy measured the screen and said it's one of the best he's seen.

    Chris has about any configuration you like including DIY.

    How Come New Tables Never Have S-Type Arms on Them?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted · Edited by dwilawyer

    Hi Travis -- I didn't know you had a Basis Vector.  Which arm do you prefer?  Still using the Transfiguration?

    Here is the link to the reviews and the story about you asking the distributor to send a couple if Transfigs to my Dealer

     

    Edit:  2nd try at posting that link:  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/85166-cartridge-auditions-part-deaux-photos/?hl=%2Btransfiguration+%2Bvector

    • Like 1

    How Come New Tables Never Have S-Type Arms on Them?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    I didn't state the anti-skate part correctly.  I believe all tonearms, except tangential required an anti-skate device of some sort.  The s-shape tonearms seemed to do it with a spring device that was controlled by a knob which added or reduced spring tension.

     

    My Vector, SME, Hadcock arms all use a counter-weight, as opposed to a spring, the theory being you don't want that aspect coupled to the arm board, but someone who knows more about the early SME arms would know more about that aspect.  An S shape gives you a longer effective length, and space advantages, at the cost of more mass and a spring anti-skate.  

     

    You can still buy one new off the shelf if you want, not Technics, but Pioneer looks like they have copied their design.

     

    http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/DJ/Turntable/PLX-1000

    How Come New Tables Never Have S-Type Arms on Them?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    Simple geometry my dear boy.  To save space. If you follow the angle of a straight arm backward in a straight line, you'll see that it puts the pivot point further off to the right (while viewing from the front). But bent, the pivot can be nearer the platter. It was a matter of design function.  However, it does mean that the "pull" of the stylus in the groove is now being applied at an angle to the pivot point, instead of directly. This creates torque on the pivot, and that torque is the reason for the "anti-skate" screw adjustment you see on tables that typically came with  S-shaped tone arms.

     

    They started, I believe, with Technics tables.  They went out of favor because the S-shape required a higher mass (thicker tube to make the S), as well as the and "anti-skate" knob adjustment.

     

    Travis 

    Cool "Floating" Console

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    Here is my beauty. I love MCM and couldn't gut it and it was the last item at an estate sale they called me as I was leaving $20.....

    The day we moved it out of the house was the first time it had been moved since the mid 50's.... The place where it was originally purchased was 8 blocks from where I live now.

    ..

    that is a great deck SETI, Does it work? What tape was that in the photo? Buddy Holly on Coral?

    Travis

    Vinyl LPs Sales Increase Near 40%

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    How many records do you guys own in your collection? What's the ratio between brand spanking new (artists get paid) vs. used (artists don't get paid)? How many years have you been collecting?

    I have been collecting since I was about 10, so about 40 years.

    About 500 prerecorded reel to reel tapes, I started with about 25 from my Dad, and the remainder would be about 90/10. Some I purchased new when they were still available? Then, more recently some new ones from The Tape Project, but the vast majority used because they are not really made anymore like vinyl still is.

    LPs, about 3,000 but I am going to downsize that down to 1,000 because of, as you say, the space. I would say at least 50 percent of those I bought new. I try to buy local whenever I can from my locally owned record store, whether new or used, and I try to find it new locally before looking elsewhere. I was able to get 2010 Zeppelin box set locally, I have Beatles mono set due out in September on preorder locally.

    Now the big question, how many of those 2,165 LPs did you purchase? It seems like all of the digital files I have, maybe 30, we're a free down load, or included with an lp purchase. I wish I could convert all of this wax to digital, but it would just take an eternity and I am not going to kill myself to do it, I guess I just like being able to hold an lp or tape box and read the packaging.

    Travis

    Digital vs analog

    in Technical/Restorations

    Posted

    Vinyl played through an excellent tube preamp to digital xover to 300B SET amps to bi amped Jubilee is much closer.

    In my post above I was wondering how much of what I heard through Rigma's system was the preamp/amp vs the analog crossover. I thought it was the best sound I heard compared the solid state amps and digital crossovers but was thinking what I was liking was mostly the great pre/amp (even the brand of tubes was top notch) as opposed to the crossovers, which I felt were only making a minor difference. If I am understanding you correctly in the quote above you would agree with that?

    To follow up on that, what would you say would be more of an improvement on the Jubes, TAD drivers or going to analog crossovers?

    Thanks

    Travis

    Digital vs analog

    in Technical/Restorations

    Posted

    This was the original poster's original question:

    Thoughts on a digital crossover vs analog crossover affecting sound.

    I
    think CASK gave a direct answer to this, that other then Rigma and Dean
    G, he wasn't aware of anyone being able to tell the difference between
    music through a a digital crossover and an analog crossover. I listened
    to Jubilees through Rigma's analog crossovers, with 300b tube amps, as compared to digital crossovers, both Crown amps with builtin crossovers and a DX38 with solid state amplification, and I much prefered the sound of rigma's system. I wish I had a pair of his crossovers but I don't have the technical know how to build them. I might add that the source for all of these comparisons was a CD player that cost under $100.00. We may have stuck in a better CD player when we listened to Rigma's crossovers, but I don't recall as it has been so long ago. So I don't know if what I prefered about Rigma's system was the crossovers, the tube amplificatio, tube preamp, or if it was a combanation of all three. I would like to think that I have heard enough 300b tube systems that I can say that I think a lot of what I was hearing was in his amp and pre-amp and only a small amount was attributable to the crossovers, but that is pure speculation.

    I have never had the opportunity to listen to an identical set up with the only difference being the crossovers, digital vs. analog. I think in a very pure analog system, if you are one of those that can tell the difference between a CD and a LP being played then you might be able to notice the difference between an analog crossover vs. a digital one. I generally prefer the sound of analog in two track listening, especially prerecorded high quality tape, but I don't believe that the digital crossovers take away from the analog "warmth" that most people prefer when they say they have a preference.

    I too would be curious as to what others think, ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, what, if any, real listening difference there is between digital and analog crossovers. That is same analog source, same preamp, same amp, etc., etc.

    As to all of the other comments on digital vs. analog in general, it is never going to be solved here but here are a few comments in response to what some others have said.

    As far as quotes, my favorite on digital vs. analog came from a recording artist, with superior hearing due to his disability, who owned his own state of the art recording studio called RPM. He said this:

    “I have to tell you man. In listening to sound, I guess what I’m after
    is the closest thing that I can get to reality. Now, I know it’s not
    going to be reality, cause the thing gotta go through wires and gotta go
    through filters and this and that. I understand all that. But what I
    really like is to get as close to the natural sound of the instruments
    as possible. That’s why I like analog as opposed to digital. Because I
    don’t give a s**t what anybody tells you man, I know what you guys are
    going to tell me…’Oh yeah, but it’s clean Ray!’ Well it’s clean but it
    don’t got no balls!!!” – 1999 interview with Ray Charles by Michael
    Hobson of Classic Records

    As far as tape to tape transfer distortion, it has really been a non-issue since the time of 1" tape and beyond. If you read Recording the Beatles by Kevin Ryan or Emerick"s, Here There And Everywhere, you will see that The Beatles' first two lp's were recorded on two track 1/4" tape, with tracks bounced up and down sometimes in excess of 50 times. What EMI's speciality was at the time was to be able to bounce tracks and overdub numerous times with a minimal amout of noise and in such a way that it greatly exceeded the noise floor. By the era of the 70's with multitrack recorders, and tapes capable of being saturated at 9+ db without distortion the issue of distortion, degradation, etc. from going from the original tracking tape all the way to the mastering tape was a non-issue. It can't be heard with good equipment and proper recording techniques.

    Here is a Youtube video of Bernie Grundman, whom everyone should have heard of, talking about mastering and that he wants the original tracking hardrive iwhenever possible because a copy, in any form, DVD, CD, degrades the sound. This seemed odd to me, since digital should be the same regardless if it is the original hardrive, a copy of that HD, a DVD, or a CD. However, I have seen him speak on this several times and he is very strong in his view that a copy of the HD results in degraded sound. The AES position on this, discussed below, supports his conclusion. They say deliever the original tracking HDD in Broadcase Wave format in a protective padded case.

    For a another good discussion about digital vs. analog in recording and mastering here is a youtube clip from Greg Calbi who should need no introduction either. I believe this is the consensus you will find in the recording industry today, there are advantages and disadvantages to both digital and analog and you really need to see what is going to work best for the project you are doing.

    Both of those youtube videos were part of the ArtistsHouseMusic project and for those who are really interested in accurate information about in digital vs.analog, at the RECORDING/MIXING/MASTERING stage, by people who really do this for a living and are considered to be the top in the industry, there are a number of videos worth looking at as part of the 2,000 videos they have on file. The above two are a couple of good examples of what you can find there.

    For an excellent discussion of the advantages of digital and analog, with compairsons YOU CAN LISTEN TO, between the tape and digital recordings here is a link.

    http://recordinghacks.com/2013/01/26/analog-tape-vs-digital/

    As this article suggests, even today in the digital age and with all of the advantages of Pro Tools, a great many engineers will record, at a minimum, drums to tape, because digital just cannot capture it the way tape does. This is called hybrid recording, the drums are recorded to tape and then put into Pro Tools as a digital track. This is even done directly through CLASP (closed loop analog signal
    processor). There have been plugins created for Pro Tools to try and duplicate the sound of drums recorded on tape, but in reading what industry professionals have to say, these plugin have all come up short and so a great many recordings being done today use a hybrid approach.

    Here is yet again another video from Music industry giant Joe Galante, former President of Sony/BMG on "Why CLASP with analog tape is so important" for record labels and
    music artists today. This is hybrid recording, using both digital and analog technology, using the advantages of each.

    Here is a 2010 article from Mix Magazine, one of the leading US Publications on the technical aspects of the recording industry, discussing with four current recording engineers why they prefer tape/analog, and how they are using both Pro Tools and tape.

    http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/analog_tape_back//index.html

    The latest greatest thing in digital recording is backing up the hardrives. Several recording companies have run into problems with their high dollar digital recordings, which were done on hard drives, being damaged, or lost all together because of frozen hard drives and other problems. This has become enough of a problem that AES had to come up with a standard and issue a position paper for the standards for delivering digital and analog media to the owner (record company) of the masters, along with the number and type of safeties and the format of the audio (Broadcase Wave File format, "flattened"). The preferred backup/safetie for a hard disk drive is TAPE. Not a CD, not a DVD, but TAPE.

    Some of the comments I saw in this thread about digital vs. analog go back to the old, never settled, discussion about which is better a cd or an lp. However, some of the comments about analog/tape didn't track with what the current state of recording has been over the last 10+ years. That is, while digital has a number of advantages in terms of changing sound, it has limitations. I think Joe Galante's discussion in his video covers this best.

    On the other hand, the comments about preferences of analog over digital were someone confusing because they did not specify what recordings they were talking about. I think it was a good idea for Mike L to ask what the recordings were people were referring to when making comparisons. Any recording made from at least the early 90s is probably digital in some respect so I assume when people are comparing a analog recording (SPARS AAA) recording to a CD (which of course is either the same material in either AAD, ADD, DDD or DAD. Those would be the only two things you could compare really, or are people saying that a digitally recorded LP/Vinyl sounds better then a CD assuming both have the same bit and sampeling rates? Does anyone have a CD recorded (not remastered, or reissued) after say 1995 with a SPARS Code that isn't ADD if not DDD? I can't tell from some of the comments if people are saying they can tell the difference between (or prefer) a recording that was recorded onto tape and then digitally mixed and mastered from one that was digitally recorded.

    I generally listen to music that was made pre 1980s, and I would say, generally, my order of preference is:

    1. Prerecorded Reel to Reel tape, if issued

    2. LP, subject to multiple versions, issues, etc.

    3. SACD (many remastered versions have various tracks, for example, Pet Sounds, has original Mono, real stereo for the first time, etc.)

    I think I only have on DVD-A and so cannot really comment on that.

    I would say for the older stuff, pre-digital era, I would agree with those who prefer the analog version. However, anything recorded since 1995 that was recorded digitally, (first letter in the SPARS Code), is there really going to be a difference if it ends up on vinyl at some point?

    Travis

    Ampex - 196 Mastering Series

    in Garage Sale

    Posted

    Travis, you know more about it than I do for sure. Aren't those holes bigger than NAB?

    Well thanks for the vote of confidence but I am not very knowledgable when it comes to video tape, but I am pretty sure that the NAB standard applies to both video and audio tape, but not positive. The advantage with using reels from insturmentation tape and video, if the hubs are in fact the same size, is that they used very rugged AND precision flanges (the metal part of the "reel"). They are thicker than typical audio tape flanges and very flat without wobble. This is why you never want to pick and hold a metal reel by pinching it on sides, it will go out of true. You should always hold them and lift by the the hub, the hole in the middle. Most audio decks can easily accomodate this extra thickness. The disadvangage is that is some cases you cannot exchange these flanges onto a thinnner hub (i.e. 1/4 or 1/2") like you can with most other audio tape.

    If Cigar has access to to a audio deck with NAB spindles he would be able to see right away if the hole diamater is the same along with the three slots that the hubs slide onto. If so, they are valuable as "percision" reels.

    However, they don't look as valuable as I thougt, a lot of 16 just like his recently sold on Ebay for $65. If they are convertable to 1/4" hubs that is a real steal for empty percision reels. Precision hubs are easy to spot as they use 5, sometimes 6, screws to secure the flanges to the hubs instead of the typical 3 screws.

    US Recording sells the screw kits for 1/4" hubs to be able to convert them, however, because of the thinkness and rugged nature of the flanges this sometimes does not work and it of course assumes that you have extra 5 screw 1/4" percision hubs laying around.

    Travis

    Ampex - 196 Mastering Series

    in Garage Sale

    Posted

    Cigarbum,

    These still have value as empty reels. They appear to be brand new in the box, with NAB hubs, they are worth at least $20 each as empty take up reels. You can probably get a quick buyer for them at the Tapeheads forum.

    Travis

    US Grand Prix, Circuit of the Americas, Austin (Elroy) Texas

    in General Klipsch Info

    Posted

    I see your governor called out the national guard for police duty for the race.

    Or did he?

    If he didn't, someone is eligible for an all-expense-paid-vacation for several years in a prime federal facility.

    If your governor did call them out you need to ask him why he abused his authority, he is not supposed to call the guard out (except in times of an emergency).

    I have no idea, there were National Guard there. I'm sure Alex Jones or someone of his ilk will have all of the "facts" and low down on if they were there or not. However, Posse Comitatus does not apply to the national guard, and as far as I know, the Guard can assist local law enforcement within a state whether an emergency exists or not. I beleive the Govenor can even request the Guard from another state to assist in law enforcement. There is no requirement that an emergency exist.

    As far as not doing anything and someone going to a federal facility for several years I have no idea what you are talking about.

    Travis

    US Grand Prix, Circuit of the Americas, Austin (Elroy) Texas

    in General Klipsch Info

    Posted

    I have really been enjoying the US Grand Prix here at the Circuit of the Americas in Austin, Texas the last two days, and very much looking forward to the race starting here in just less than two hours. I have been to previous USGP's in late 70s and early 80s and this is really something. They need to get the new road built into the track, but other then that, it has really been an incredible weekend so far.

    Anyone else from Klipsch forums on here besides me. I thought I had heard that Gilbert was going. Next year we will need to get some of you Gearheads down here to enjoy this.

    Travis

    TASCAM 34B or Revox A77 MK IV ?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    PS: After thinking abot this for a moment, if you have a chance for a refurbished Revox A, I would jump on that. You are getting slightly better frequency response on the bottom end with the Revox, and a little better S/N ratio. I think you will be vrey, very happy with that Revox.

    Travis

    TASCAM 34B or Revox A77 MK IV ?

    in 2-Channel Home Audio

    Posted

    You cannot go wrong with either of those decks. Both very well made, you can still get parts, including pinch rollers direct from Tascam if that is any consideration.

    One is a four track home audio teck (Revox) and the other is a pro deck that will give you more flexibility on recording. I agree with Larry, and have listened to his deck, the Revox is a nice solid piece of equipment. You will be very happy with either of these decks, but if you have no intention of doing much recording or playing at 15 ips you should probably lean towards the Revox and then you have two decks that can play your 3.75 ips tapes.

    Is the head wear the same for both decks?

    Travis

×
×
  • Create New...