On 24/07/2017 10:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Just the name.

It's basically a US term. It wasn't used for speakers when I started my
career in broadcast. A monitor produced pictures. ;-)

Just about any type of speaker has been used as a so called monitor at one
time or another.

One term was 'average quality monitor'. That would be used to give a rough
idea of what people heard at home - as opposed to the speakers in pro use.
Aurotone being one example - just a single driver in a small box.

You'd hope that any speaker called a monitor would have tight quality
control - so that all of the same make and model sounded the same.

But then in a recording studio they may be custom made units anyway - just
for that studio.


On the subject of speakers - and at the risk of hijacking things [sorry] - I
have a pair of 15" Gauss speakers. circa 1978 ish that I'd forgotten about
until crawling around in the loft the other day. No idea at this point whether
they still work of not - they did when stored - the point is, are they worth
hanging on to?

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On Saturday, 12 August 2017 06:04:08 UTC+3, ~misfit~ wrote:


There was another 'temptation that was abundant in that environment' that
was only destructive to relationships. As I previously mentioned four of the
five 'playing' band members were married and we were on the road (without
the wives) 75% of the time...

It was a great thing to experience though for a single man. ;-)

Ah yes:

A sermon, dear friends, you are about to receive
On John Barleycorn, nicotine, and the temptations of Eve"

There is a story regarding the Fletcher Henderson band, who were playing a gig in St.Louis, the home town of one of the saxophone players. This particular musician was propositioned by a pretty young girl after the gig. Slowly, he looked her up and down, and said, in a way that only an African-American jazz musician can, "Honey, you are young enough to be ma daughter. And if you look anything like your mother, I would say that is not beyond the realms of possibility!"

He drank his cocoa alone that night:-)

Iain

On Monday, 31 July 2017 22:47:57 UTC+3, wrote:
On Sunday, 23 July 2017 08:36:56 UTC+1, Phil Allison wrote:
In a word "harsh".

But in a magazine review, where the speaker manufacturer is an advertiser, "detailed and analytical"

Some weeks ago, before the JBL L100s were mentioned here, I had the opportunity to borrow a pristine pair with a view to purchase. One still seems them in some quite salubrious places, and a colleague of mine has a pair, so I thought I would give them a try.

They are indeed "bright" but for 60s/70s jazz they take some beating. This pair is perfect except that the front grilles have seen better days. I got new grilles made, and stuck cardboard discs, about the size of a Euro coin, inside the grille, in front of the tweeter and mid range unit. This attenuates the brightness. I very much like the detail and good stereo staging.

Tonight, I listened to the Buddy Rich album "Big Swing Face" on them. It's an album I know well. I enjoyed it immensely.

Iain

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:04:01 +0100, Iain Churches wrote:

sunnuntai 23. heinäkuuta 2017 17.36.49 UTC+3 Brian Gaff kirjoitti:

This was why CDs made from the vinyl masters sounded
so toppy and bass light.

What do you mean by a vinyl master? Nothing except vinyl pressings can
be made from the stamper.
The studio mix master (analogue or digital) was/is the source for vinyl,
cassettes, eight track cartridges and CD production.

As I understand it, some record companies had the cutting engineer make a
tape copy of the audio sent to the lathe so that they could send the same
master to be cut elsewhere or to make another identical copy at a later
date. Some of these masters also included the RIAA eq.

I remember hearing a Heaven 17 CD back in the 80's that sounded like it
came from an RIAA eq'd master. I already had a vinyl copy so didn't buy it
so can't check whether it was really RIAA eq'd or just odd.

--
JRP Music - http://www.jrpmusic.co.uk

On Tuesday, 15 August 2017 18:34:35 UTC+3, James Perrett wrote:


As I understand it, some record companies had the cutting engineer make a
tape copy of the audio sent to the lathe so that they could send the same
master to be cut elsewhere or to make another identical copy at a later
date. Some of these masters also included the RIAA eq.

Cutting engineers did not/do not, make tape copies - studios have separate facilities for that. But it is true that sometimes masters where also cut locally by overseas agents from copy tapes. Much more common was that an extra set of disk stampers were grown from the same matrix and these were used for production elsewhere.


The RIAA record equalisation is added by the preamplifier section of the cutting amplifier, It is the inverse of the RIAA playback curve.

Iain

In article ,
James Perrett wrote:
As I understand it, some record companies had the cutting engineer make
a tape copy of the audio sent to the lathe so that they could send the
same master to be cut elsewhere or to make another identical copy at a
later date. Some of these masters also included the RIAA eq.

Assuming analogue tape, you'd get rather poor results if you applied RIAA
to that.

And generally, you'd not want to use more generations of tape than
absolutely necessary. Although Saga records could do anything. ;-)

--
*Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tuesday, 15 August 2017 20:07:35 UTC+3, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Although Saga records could do anything. ;-)

You are probably unaware that the three people who staffed the Saga studio were ex-BBC :-)

Iain

On 12/08/2017 18:36, David Kennedy wrote:
On 24/07/2017 10:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Just the name.

It's basically a US term. It wasn't used for speakers when I started my
career in broadcast. A monitor produced pictures. ;-)

Just about any type of speaker has been used as a so called monitor at one
time or another.

One term was 'average quality monitor'. That would be used to give a rough
idea of what people heard at home - as opposed to the speakers in pro use.
Aurotone being one example - just a single driver in a small box.

You'd hope that any speaker called a monitor would have tight quality
control - so that all of the same make and model sounded the same.

But then in a recording studio they may be custom made units anyway - just
for that studio.


On the subject of speakers - and at the risk of hijacking things [sorry] - I
have a pair of 15" Gauss speakers. circa 1978 ish that I'd forgotten about
until crawling around in the loft the other day. No idea at this point whether
they still work of not - they did when stored - the point is, are they worth
hanging on to?

Well I suppose I'd better bin them then...

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On 18/08/2017 01:53, David Kennedy wrote:
On 12/08/2017 18:36, David Kennedy wrote:
On 24/07/2017 10:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â* Andrew wrote:
Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Just the name.

It's basically a US term. It wasn't used for speakers when I started my
career in broadcast. A monitor produced pictures. ;-)

Just about any type of speaker has been used as a so called monitor
at one
time or another.

One term was 'average quality monitor'. That would be used to give a
rough
idea of what people heard at home - as opposed to the speakers in pro
use.
Aurotone being one example - just a single driver in a small box.

You'd hope that any speaker called a monitor would have tight quality
control - so that all of the same make and model sounded the same.

But then in a recording studio they may be custom made units anyway -
just
for that studio.


On the subject of speakers - and at the risk of hijacking things
[sorry] - I
have a pair of 15" Gauss speakers. circa 1978 ish that I'd forgotten
about
until crawling around in the loft the other day. No idea at this point
whether
they still work of not - they did when stored - the point is, are they
worth
hanging on to?

Well I suppose I'd better bin them then...


Woke me up :-)

A google (I know nothing of them first hand) suggests that they were
used in in the 70s as pro 'hall fillers' and in guitar amps, but some
very mixed reviews. A couple of ebay sales, but one in 2013 couldn't
shift a pair for 99p.

I'd listen to them first, see if you like them. If not, stick them on
ebay, buyer collects. If that doesn't work a local community forum
classified. Then the tip.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 18/08/2017 06:28, RJH wrote:
On 18/08/2017 01:53, David Kennedy wrote:
On 12/08/2017 18:36, David Kennedy wrote:
On 24/07/2017 10:34, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Other than that, what is the difference between one
and a 'normal' speaker.

Just the name.

It's basically a US term. It wasn't used for speakers when I started my
career in broadcast. A monitor produced pictures. ;-)

Just about any type of speaker has been used as a so called monitor at one
time or another.

One term was 'average quality monitor'. That would be used to give a rough
idea of what people heard at home - as opposed to the speakers in pro use.
Aurotone being one example - just a single driver in a small box.

You'd hope that any speaker called a monitor would have tight quality
control - so that all of the same make and model sounded the same.

But then in a recording studio they may be custom made units anyway - just
for that studio.


On the subject of speakers - and at the risk of hijacking things [sorry] - I
have a pair of 15" Gauss speakers. circa 1978 ish that I'd forgotten about
until crawling around in the loft the other day. No idea at this point whether
they still work of not - they did when stored - the point is, are they worth
hanging on to?

Well I suppose I'd better bin them then...


Woke me up :-)

A google (I know nothing of them first hand) suggests that they were used in
in the 70s as pro 'hall fillers' and in guitar amps, but some very mixed
reviews. A couple of ebay sales, but one in 2013 couldn't shift a pair for 99p.

I'd listen to them first, see if you like them. If not, stick them on ebay,
buyer collects. If that doesn't work a local community forum classified. Then
the tip.

They're just chassis, no cabs. They were used - AFAICR - in stage monitors so
I suspect they have a fairly large range on them although, like you I can't
find much info on the interweb. I seem to remember they were associated with
Cadac in some way and the Cadac studio monitors I heard - around the size of a
largish wardrobe - were, at the time late '70s, very good. I suppose I could
take my Tannoys apart and put them in instead of the monitor golds but I'm not
certain they'd be better...

I just wondered, after all, in amongst all the static, there is a fair amount
of experience in this NG

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com