Here's another little comparison between 3 variants of the *same model*
cartridge.

First question is 'Name That Tune' (I asked Don to pick summat, but he
didn't come back on it, so I chose this) - anybody here got a clue who the
band is? My guess is that *nobody* knows them. Clue - the LP itself is
probably older than a good few here and you would have to be seriously cool
(a long time ago) to know them....!! :-)

At the risk of giving the game away, the sleeve notes give: "There was this
mad flamenco person who looked good with flowers in her teeth." :-)


Here are the raw recordings (2m13s each):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2001.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2002.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2003.mp3


Second question is, quite simply, is one of them *better* than the others?


Next is my first real attempt at matching the sound levels after the
recordings (after recent criticisms here ;-), which was called
'normalising' in Sound Forge??? (Is this the right way to go - fuct if I
know....????)

So, third question is 'Do these sound better for the purposes of a
comparison?' and does any one stand out as 'better than the others?
Cartridge numbers 1, 2 and 3 remain constant throughout, naturally...


http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3


(In case any 'transatlantic types' here want to dismiss the sound *out of
hand* as ****, they best be advised all the boxes give the point of origin
as 'Evanston, Illinois, USA'.... :-)

"Keith G" wrote in message
.. .

Here's another little comparison between 3 variants of the *same model*
cartridge.



Dawns on me that there are *some* here always looking for the catch, so
here's a pick of the three carts in question:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/threcarts.jpg


(Note the green, grey and black styliylee.... ;-)

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:17:07 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


Here's another little comparison between 3 variants of the *same model*
cartridge.

First question is 'Name That Tune' (I asked Don to pick summat, but he
didn't come back on it, so I chose this) - anybody here got a clue who the
band is? My guess is that *nobody* knows them. Clue - the LP itself is
probably older than a good few here and you would have to be seriously cool
(a long time ago) to know them....!! :-)

At the risk of giving the game away, the sleeve notes give: "There was this
mad flamenco person who looked good with flowers in her teeth." :-)


Here are the raw recordings (2m13s each):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2001.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2002.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2003.mp3


Second question is, quite simply, is one of them *better* than the others?


Next is my first real attempt at matching the sound levels after the
recordings (after recent criticisms here ;-), which was called
'normalising' in Sound Forge??? (Is this the right way to go - fuct if I
know....????)

So, third question is 'Do these sound better for the purposes of a
comparison?' and does any one stand out as 'better than the others?
Cartridge numbers 1, 2 and 3 remain constant throughout, naturally...


http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3


(In case any 'transatlantic types' here want to dismiss the sound *out of
hand* as ****, they best be advised all the boxes give the point of origin
as 'Evanston, Illinois, USA'.... :-)





If the other ones were hard to use for checking quality, these are
absolutely impossible! The music is just too confused to hear through
it.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote



If the other ones were hard to use for checking quality, these are
absolutely impossible! The music is just too confused to hear through
it.


Well, I said you pick summat and you didn't get back on it....

What sort of thing do you want? - Name a precise track (or two) and I'll try
to get as close as I can! (I just got time to throw three more tracks up
before teatime and going out afterwards...)

Also, do you want 'normalised' or without....?

(How about a flake as well? :-)

"Keith G" wrote


What sort of thing do you want? - Name a precise track (or two) and I'll
try to get as close as I can!


Lemme give you a hand here and give you some idea - I got Frank Bridge,
Frank Sinatra and Frank Zappa (all on vinyl), but I got no Frank Ifield....

Does that help?

"Keith G" wrote in message
.. .

Here's another little comparison between 3 variants of the *same model*
cartridge.

First question is 'Name That Tune' (I asked Don to pick summat, but he
didn't come back on it, so I chose this) - anybody here got a clue who the
band is? My guess is that *nobody* knows them. Clue - the LP itself is
probably older than a good few here and you would have to be seriously
cool (a long time ago) to know them....!! :-)

At the risk of giving the game away, the sleeve notes give: "There was
this mad flamenco person who looked good with flowers in her teeth." :-)


Here are the raw recordings (2m13s each):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2001.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2002.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ample%2003.mp3


Second question is, quite simply, is one of them *better* than the others?


Next is my first real attempt at matching the sound levels after the
recordings (after recent criticisms here ;-), which was called
'normalising' in Sound Forge??? (Is this the right way to go - fuct if I
know....????)

So, third question is 'Do these sound better for the purposes of a
comparison?' and does any one stand out as 'better than the others?
Cartridge numbers 1, 2 and 3 remain constant throughout, naturally...


http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...ormalised).mp3


(In case any 'transatlantic types' here want to dismiss the sound *out of
hand* as ****, they best be advised all the boxes give the point of origin
as 'Evanston, Illinois, USA'.... :-)

Encode to OGG and it'll sound better :-)

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:18:52 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Keith G" wrote


What sort of thing do you want? - Name a precise track (or two) and I'll
try to get as close as I can!


Lemme give you a hand here and give you some idea - I got Frank Bridge,
Frank Sinatra and Frank Zappa (all on vinyl), but I got no Frank Ifield....

Does that help?




A lack of Frank Ifield ALWAYS helps.

All that stuff you are naming is heavily processed, and not great for
assessing carts - there is no real "original" sound you can compare it
to. Some classical - not heavy orchestral - perhaps a chamber
orchestra piece would be good.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote


A lack of Frank Ifield ALWAYS helps.


No argument there....


All that stuff you are naming is heavily processed, and not great for
assessing carts - there is no real "original" sound you can compare it
to. Some classical - not heavy orchestral - perhaps a chamber
orchestra piece would be good.


OK, can do - narrow it down a bit and steer me to summat you'll be
comfortable with.

(Missed the boat tonight though....)

"Nath" wrote


Encode to OGG and it'll sound better :-)


OK, webspace constraints notwithstanding, that'll make 'em *dead* handy
won't it!! :-)


Reminds me of this one:


Jock's overdone it on a Saturday night and fallen foul of the Grim Reaper.
He's up at the Pearly Gates making a fuss when a little window is flung back
and the Archangel Gabriel calls down:

"Who is it? Woss all the noise about?"

Jock says "It's me - ah'm deed, let me yin!"

AA Gabriel says "Are you a Scot by any chance?"

Jocks says "Oh aye, that ah *am*!"

AA Gabriel says "Well you can **** off then - we're not cooking porridge for
one!"

:-)

"Keith G" wrote in message
.. .

"Nath" wrote


Encode to OGG and it'll sound better :-)


OK, webspace constraints notwithstanding, that'll make 'em *dead* handy
won't it!! :-)

eh?