Jump to content

SteinbergerHack

Members
  • Content Count

    24,242
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    130

Posts posted by SteinbergerHack

  1. Originally posted by ThomasH

    Case in point: I just bought Morrissey's new album and I think it's excellent except for the mastering. I the music industry would actually start putting out music that is properly mastered...



    This is because of MP3s. The lossy compression scheme used for MP3 encoding doesn't deal well with highly dynamic signals, so the noise-peddlers have changed their procedures to match.

    It's all about the lowest common denominator - where the big volume and profits are. In the 70s and 80s, the 'top' (read: most prolific) mixing and mastering guys kept a set of Auratone monitors around to check how their mixes would sound on a car stereo. Now, I'd bet the 'top' studios put everything onto an iPod before they call it a wrap.

    Some days, I just want to go put on an LP of 'Dark Side of the Moon' or 'Aqualung', turn off the lights, pour a glass of something, and pretend digital never happened......

    I think I'm now officially a geezer, or at least a curmudgeon.

  2. Originally posted by whitegreyblack

    Get a Steinberger.

    I have one - a GL2TA. It has flown all over the world, and fits quite nicely in the overhead compartment. The only trouble is that the soft case bears a remarkable resemblance to the case for a Mini-14.:eek: It gets X-rayed a LOT.

  3. Go back in time to the late 70s....

     

    There was an amp imported by Unicord called a 'Stage 400'. 40 Watts of ear-bleeding SS power through 2 12" Celestions (whatever was the cheapest thing Celestion made....).

     

    I owned one, and it truly, truly sucked. I saw something that looked a lot like on in a used shop the other day - sent a chill down my spine.

     

    Next in line might be the old Gibson Lab Series.....

  4. Originally posted by fingerstyleman

    I hear what a lot of guys are saying re-set-up, but more fool the buyer of ANY guitar if he/she doesn't negotiate a full set-up by the in-house luthier to be included in the price of any new or used instrument.

     

    There's the rub. The big-box music retailers don't have in-house luthiers, so there is no setup.

     

    If you're buying at GC, the guitar that's been hanging on the rack for 6 months with dead strings probably won't play any better than a cheap$hit Agile, no matter how great a guitar it was coming from the factory. Since they cannot and will not do anything to set the guitar up for you, that's what you get - a decent guitar that plays like crap because it's not set up properly.

     

    Also, the Gibsons (don't know if this is true for other high-end brands) that go to GC are a special GC-spec that are built in higher volume at lower cost, and do NOT receive that same level of setup and scrutiny that the VOS RIs and Custom Shop instruments get. Basically, Gibson does knock-offs of their own guitars and sells them through GC, etc.

     

    If you want to really see what a high-end Gibson is about, you have to go to a Gibson Custom Shop dealer, or at least a shop that deals in the Historic lines. You cannot play a couple of LP Studios at GC and assume that they are representative of the whole line of guitars - if you do, then you really don't understand much about how guitars are built, marketed, and sold. This is all about Gibson having two channels; a high-volume, mid-quality, low-margin (GC), and a low-volume, high-quality, high-margin channel (Custom Shop & Historic dealers).

     

    Also, until you've played on of the new VOSs with the factory PLEK job, you really don't know how good a guitar can be - it's really that cool.

  5. Originally posted by Omri_Maor


    I want an amp for under 700 with all the vintage tones, good cleans, does a marshall or ac30 impersonation well, and is really worth the money.

    If you want a Marshall impersonation, why not just buy a Marshall? Some of the smaller tube combos, like the JTM 60 or the Artist 4203 can be had for that level of $$$....

  6. Originally posted by Marshall Freak

    Apparantly you technically inclined guys have never used more than one 4X12 with a 100 watt head.



    Yes, I have - Marshall 1960s with a Bogner XTC. I've also used a pair of 1966 2x12s (mini-stack) with a 50W Marshall tube head. I've been through the whole SPL meter thing, too. The physics modeling works.

    Your point was....?

  7. Originally posted by tommythelurker

    I see what you're saying. It still blows my mind that the reinforcing nodes are 3dB more. It does sound like you could theoretically increase the volume infinitely
    at that point
    just by adding more speakers.



    Yes, but only at one specific frequency (and the even harmonics of that frequency).

    You're getting the point, though. This is how a laser works; it operates by getting all the molecules in its matrix to emit light exactly in phase, and in the same direction. This is how you can get a small laser sight to light up a rifle target 100 yards away using only a AA battery; a non-coherent source could never do that. :cool:

    If you can get enough different molecules to emit coherent, colinear radiation at the same time, you can cut through steel.:D

    BTW, you've probably guessed by now that my physics classes didn't stop at the undergrad level....

  8. Originally posted by tommythelurker

    I see your point about the distance, but with the proximity of the speakers in the cabs and the typical listening distance, I think the correlated case is the proper condition (albeit somewhat simplified).

     

    Oversimplified. The average over the room volume will be 50 dB. What happens when two (effective) point sources emit the same waveform is that a series of alternating nodes form. This is already happening from the 4 speakers in each cabinet - it just gets more complex when you double the number of sources.

     

    The nodes in this case would alternate between reinforcement and cancellation of the waveform, with the maxima being 53dB and the minima being 0dB. The node patterns are frequency-dependent; the spacing is based on a half-wavelength spread. Given that you now have effectively 8 point sources, the net effect is an averaging over the room, hence the 50 dB average SPL.

     

    Yes, it will sound fuller at high volumes; this is due to the reduction in compression (effectively doubling the cabinet volume) effect I mentioned earlier. [The 'compression effect' is due to the limitation in the speaker cone's excursion from the pressure created in a closed-back cabinet. This effect gets more pronounced at lower frequencies, due to the longer cone excursions at lower frequencies to get the same SPL. In an open-back cabinet, this effect will only occur when the cone/voice coil has reached its travel limits, in which case it's probably blown or about to blow anyway....]

  9. Originally posted by tommythelurker



    Except that he's wrong.


    I used to think exactly the same way he does, but someone insisted that I was wrong and so I did the research.


    Turns out, all else being equal, 8 speakers will be 3 db louder than 4 speakers into the same amp with the same total power.


    This is the website I found that explains it, but you have to go through several pages and it's not an easy read:


    http://physics.mtsu.edu/~wmr/log_1.htm

     

    OK, read through this 101-level undergrad homework assignment again. Now, they have an SPL addition example problem in the 47-50 dB range.

     

    To clarify our situation in light of this example, let's assume that the original SPL from a single 4x12 cabinet is outputting roughly 50 dB, OK? [bedroom playing volume, I guess]

     

    Now, if I'm using a tube amp, the current through each speaker individually will be cut in half when I add the second cabinet (assuming I change the output transformer impedance to match the new load - I want the amp to survive the exercise). This results in the original 4x12 cabinet now putting out 47dB, right? Simple math so far. Now, assuming the second cabinet is roughly identical, it will also be putting out 47dB. Still simple math.

     

    Now, if I have two cabinets in close proximity both putting out 47 dB, and we assume that the signals are phase-coherent, they will sum to the same original 50 dB as the single cabinet. [You can check the math yourself if you don't buy mine....]

     

    Yes, there will be a difference in the character of the sound, as each speaker is operating at a lower individual volume, and you have doubled the effective cabinet volume (changing the damping characteristics), but unless you were over-driving the original cabinet, thus causing the drop to half-current to have an impact of

     

    Please, if you're going to quote an introductory physics text, use a valid set of examples.

  10. The other guitarist in my band got an Edwards LP a couple of weeks ago. When I played it, I thought the sound and action were excellent. His had a '59-style neck, which is a bit thick for my taste, but it was a very nice guitar. Probably 85-90% as good as a real Gibson RI, but at a much lower price. (I played a brand-new R9 VOS a couple of days earlier, so I believe the comparison is fairly valid.)

    Now, he had bought this guitar sight unseen over the net, so I cannot give a reading as to whether this was one of their best, one of their worst, or middle-of-the-road. Personally, I have trouble with the concept of buying a guitar I can't play first - I tend to play a BUNCH of instruments before I buy - but this one was certainly a nice guitar and a great value.

  11. Originally posted by grumphh

    Would somebody with an SPL meter and a full stack please just Turn up his bloody amp to max and then measure the levels at an equal distance with one, respectively two cabs (of the same make with the same speakers obviously) so that we can get this discussion over with? *


    This is not a theoretical issue but can actually be measured.

    So do it!



    * This discussion has been here for as long as i have read this board, and man, i just want the definitive answer!

    Then we can get back to interesting discussion topics, such as breasts and new ways of making a 100 w amp suitable for home use.

     

    Damn good point.

     

    I did this about a week after I bought my first Marshall stack back in '86. See my above post......

  12. Originally posted by maz_master



    I hear the difference primarily in the low end when using distortion on the amp or with OD pedals. It's much more defined and articulate.

    [...]

    However, oddly enough, for clean tones, nobody noticed a really big difference. So, it seems you need to push a little power and generate some harmonics to hear the difference...at least with the cables I tested and the guitar/amp/effects I used. I'm sure it also depends on which cables you're comparing. Just because a cable is expensive doesn't mean it's better.


    Hmmmm.....

    So what do you think is creating the difference? Capacitance between the conductors, maybe? Inductive effects? It certainly would have nothing to do with basic cable resistance.

    What you've described almost makes sense, if you assume that the difference is all in higher frequencies (over 2-3K), which jives with it only being noticeable in distorted tones......

  13. Originally posted by toneboy720

    I'm taught in physics that a current of about 20 milliamps is enough to kill you and the voltage is irrelevent. Doesn't this mean that manufacturers should label amps saying : Danger High Current?


    The Voltage isn't really irrelevant, but it is the current that will do the damage, i.e., stop your heart and/or fry your nervous system.

    If you are a high-impedance load (i.e., dry & clean), then it will take a very high Voltage to get to the 35 mA (this is the level I've always seen) it takes to send the amount of your life insurance policy to your heirs.

    If, OTOH, you are sweaty, your impedance drops, and it will take a much smaller Voltage to pass the required current through your internals, thus putting you into the worm-food category.

    Here's the deal: a 5-Volt, 500A power source is unlikely to cause you any harm, because 5 Volts just isn't enough potential to drive enough current through your skin. It IS enough, though, to cause real problems for you if it contacts jewelry you may be wearing - a ring can become an explosive fuse, for example.

    A 500V, 5A supply, OTOH, can easily hurt or kill someone who is wet/sweaty and has a general low impedance.

    Rule #1 - when working around high voltages OR currents, take off all metal jewelry and keep one hand in your back pocket. The worst possible situation is a hand-to-hand shock, as this runs the current right through your chest cavity - bad things can happen.

  14. Originally posted by Bob Sacamano

    the same amp should be 3 db louder when playing out of eight speakers instead of four

     

    Not true, at least for a tube amp. The power output of the amp has not changed. You have half as much power driving each speaker, so the air moved by each is roughly half as much. Now, the SPL level will be very slightly higher, but only based on the efficiency of the speakers at that specific voume, i.e., if you were pushing a single cabinet to the point of compression, you can gain as much volume as you were losing from the compression - no more.

     

    You WILL have a difference in the frequency, response, though, so you may get a very different sound character. It will also be more at ear level (assuming you stacked the cabinets), so it will appear louder to someone close by.

     

    The rules for a SS amp are different, though. By adding a second cabinet, you have dropped the load impedance, which for most SS amps will increase the power level by 2-3 dB. It's almost NEVER a full 3dB, as transistors aren't that efficient - they aren't perfect devices, so they have internal impedance that becomes significant at near-full power output. Since you've increased the actual power level, you will see an actual SPL increase.

     

    Make sense?

  15. Originally posted by liamisfun

    iv been watching lots of videos of people 'shredding' and i can only say its made me feel technically inadequate... being predominantly a blues/classic rock man... i can appreciate the technique and speed at which they play... but i can never see myself reaching that level....
    :(
    is shred for everyone? or just those that are extremely technically gifted along with having great hand-eye co-ordination?



    'Shred' is a style like many others. Truthfully, I've seen that most of the 'shredders' I've worked with can neither effectively improvise nor play with any feeling. It is almost the 'anti-blues', if you will.

    This is not to say that all shredders are incapable of improvisation or soulful licks - the good ones can. OTOH, it seems that only the really good blues players can tastefully blend in fast non-pentatonic runs and have them not sound gratuitous.

  16. Originally posted by ReneSteur



    i meant that marshall switched to those tubes, not jimi switched to those tubes =).


    My understanding was that Marshall switched away from the EL34s in the early 70s, but only for those amps going to North America. Apparently, the EL34s didn't survive shipping very well...

  17. Well, since selling more than one at a time would probably cause the morket price to drop (there just ain't eough guys with $250K to burn on these things).....

    I'd pick the best three (the lightest one for daily use & gigging, the best sounding for recording, and the best looking to show off in a display case), and then sell the other three one a year or so. Once the third one was sold, I'd be retired.

×
×
  • Create New...