"Dave xxxxx" said:

400 smackers?! And it doesn't even have a phono stage? Good luck.

Got one bid already, expect it will go for about £550

phono stage not made yet, but thats going to be about another £800 when its
ready, Quad got rid of Andy who made the pre amp before he built the
matching phono stage silly buggers

But one to go with it by another company would be EAR 834P £715
http://www.walrus.co.uk/phono/phono.htm

Seeing prices like this, I can't help feeling sorry for those who
aren't able to build a simple tube phono stage by themselves.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Dave xxxxx wrote:
Fleetie wrote:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...tem=5721046616

Yes, this popped up on one my saved Ebay searches.

400 smackers?! And it doesn't even have a phono stage? Good luck.


Got one bid already, expect it will go for about £550

phono stage not made yet, but thats going to be about another £800 when its
ready, Quad got rid of Andy who made the pre amp before he built the
matching phono stage silly buggers

But one to go with it by another company would be EAR 834P £715
http://www.walrus.co.uk/phono/phono.htm

If you want a Andy Grove designed phono stage, why not look at the WAD
Phono-II + PSU-II, IMHO in a different league from the EAR. £315 for the
two kits. If you need MC, then either use the WAD step-ups for some
Lundhall's (thats what I use, about £100 for the pair), or something by
another quality winder.

--
Nick

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 01:50:41 +0100, Nick Gorham
wrote:

Dave xxxxx wrote:
Fleetie wrote:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...tem=5721046616

Yes, this popped up on one my saved Ebay searches.

400 smackers?! And it doesn't even have a phono stage? Good luck.


Got one bid already, expect it will go for about £550

phono stage not made yet, but thats going to be about another £800 when its
ready, Quad got rid of Andy who made the pre amp before he built the
matching phono stage silly buggers

But one to go with it by another company would be EAR 834P £715
http://www.walrus.co.uk/phono/phono.htm

If you want a Andy Grove designed phono stage, why not look at the WAD
Phono-II + PSU-II, IMHO in a different league from the EAR. £315 for the
two kits. If you need MC, then either use the WAD step-ups for some
Lundhall's (thats what I use, about £100 for the pair), or something by
another quality winder.

You beat me to it! Why pay Quad prices when you can have the same (or
better) sound quality *and* the security of knowing that you have used
the best possible components and have assembled them with infinite
care! If you really want to go the valve route, Andy's WAD kits are as
good as you'll find below ARC or C-J prices.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

Why the frell anyone would make a valved unit in the 21st century is
beyond reason........................

They tend to sound bloody lovely, isn't that good enough?

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:51:17 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

Why the frell anyone would make a valved unit in the 21st century is
beyond reason........................

They tend to sound bloody lovely, isn't that good enough?

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

Nah, there's always some sucker who'll pay more for studio time with
added 'valve sound'......................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:
So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved *some*
valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state at some
point.

--
*Born free - taxed to death *

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

"DAB sounds worse than FM" wrote in news:4SA4d.660
:

Keith G wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Peter Harris wrote:
Why the frell anyone would make a valved unit in the 21st century
is beyond reason........................

They tend to sound bloody lovely, isn't that good enough?

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?


Try 'cheapness', 'expediency', 'easiness', 'laziness' or
'profitability' - the use of 'non-valve' equipment has certainly got
bugger all to do with 'sound quality'......


What about the fact that valves add high levels of distortion?

Luckily my ears aren't made by Hewlett Packard
M

In article , Sander deWaal
writes
"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

Why the frell anyone would make a valved unit in the 21st century is
beyond reason........................

They tend to sound bloody lovely, isn't that good enough?

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

You'll be surprised how many of them are.


They still use valves in broadcast.

In the transmitters where they can't harm the audio

Come to that if they used them in DAB it'd take the edge of that awful
racket:!
--
Tony Sayer

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
They still use valves in broadcast.

In the transmitters where they can't harm the audio

And where there is either no alternative or they offer superior
performance.

Come to that if they used them in DAB it'd take the edge of that awful
racket:!

Heh heh. Can you visualise an A-D convertor made from valves? Would
probably fill a large room...

--
*A fool and his money can throw one hell of a party.

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
They still use valves in broadcast.

In the transmitters where they can't harm the audio

And where there is either no alternative or they offer superior
performance.

Well solid state is catching up fast..

Come to that if they used them in DAB it'd take the edge of that awful
racket:!

Heh heh. Can you visualise an A-D convertor made from valves? Would
probably fill a large room...

No just a triode with some soft clipping applied like a couple of back
to back diodes

Oh, and a "mellow" switch to join up the digitally displaced electrons..


--
Tony Sayer

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

I misread this, you obviously meant "all valve equipment".
I did not.

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved *some*
valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state at some
point.

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.
This judging from reports by my fellow Dutch recording engineers.
And of course there's solid state involved in all cases.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:
I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved
*some* valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state
at some point.

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.

Valve microphones in that common use? Don't believe it.

Valve compressor/limiters, yes. Perhaps some EQ. But those are used as a
production tool to get a particular sound - and have no application in a
home system.

--
*(on a baby-size shirt) "Party -- my crib -- two a.m

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

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

I misread this, you obviously meant "all valve equipment".
I did not.

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved *some*
valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state at some
point.

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.
This judging from reports by my fellow Dutch recording engineers.
And of course there's solid state involved in all cases.


I don't know what all the fuss about valves/ss is about - where did it get
written that it must be one *or* the other? (Some **** trying to establish
House Rules or summat??) I've got a 50/50 split here (valves and ss) and use
them them according to the suitability of the required purpose. (Is that too
simple?)

(Of course, where either one will do, I greatly prefer valves.... :-)

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:01:04 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

I misread this, you obviously meant "all valve equipment".
I did not.

You'll be surprised how many of them are.

I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved *some*
valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state at some
point.

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.
This judging from reports by my fellow Dutch recording engineers.
And of course there's solid state involved in all cases.

Outside the Netherlands, 1% would seem reasonable, if only because
tubed mic amps are very expensive, not everyone likes them, and a vast
amount of recorded music is made in 'project studios' which are lucky
to see a discrete transistor, never mind a tube!

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 01:18:33 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

I don't know what all the fuss about valves/ss is about - where did it get
written that it must be one *or* the other? (Some **** trying to establish
House Rules or summat??) I've got a 50/50 split here (valves and ss) and use
them them according to the suitability of the required purpose. (Is that too
simple?)

Aside from when you *want* to alter the input signal, just exactly
when are valves *ever* suitable for the purpose?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Could I respectfully ask that you all remove the X-posts when replying
to these posts.

And before you tell me that I should do too, I would if I knew where you
were all from

BrritSki wrote:
Could I respectfully ask that you all remove the X-posts when replying
to these posts.

And before you tell me that I should do too, I would if I knew where
you were all from


How do we know which group you're from so that we can un-X-post your
group?...


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

DAB sounds worse than FM, Freeview, digital satellite, cable and
broadband internet radio

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 01:18:33 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

I don't know what all the fuss about valves/ss is about - where did it get
written that it must be one *or* the other? (Some **** trying to establish
House Rules or summat??) I've got a 50/50 split here (valves and ss) and
use
them them according to the suitability of the required purpose. (Is that
too
simple?)

Aside from when you *want* to alter the input signal, just exactly
when are valves *ever* suitable for the purpose?


Just about whenever I don't need to stack anything on top of the amp....
;-)

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.

Valve microphones in that common use? Don't believe it.

There are a whole host of cheap Chinese valve mics sold to the home
studio market. Check out manufacturers like Rode or Studio Electronics -
even Neumann have re-issued some of their old valve models.

Cheers.

James.

In article ,
James Perrett wrote:
More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.

Valve microphones in that common use? Don't believe it.

There are a whole host of cheap Chinese valve mics sold to the home
studio market.

Indeed. However, I was referring to the pro side. Where consistency
matters.

Check out manufacturers like Rode or Studio Electronics -
even Neumann have re-issued some of their old valve models.

Yes they have, but they're hardly in common use.

--
*'ome is where you 'ang your @ *

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

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:30:08 +0100, BrritSki
wrote:

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

Nice piece of cross-posting, BrritSki!

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

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:01:04 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" said:


So why isn't every recording or broadcast made with valve equipment?

I misread this, you obviously meant "all valve equipment".
I did not.


You'll be surprised how many of them are.

I'd be amazed if were 0.5% of non broadcast material that involved *some*
valve stages, and gob smacked if any managed without solid state at some
point.

More about 25 % involving a valve somewhere in the chain, mostly
microphones and eq/processing gear.
This judging from reports by my fellow Dutch recording engineers.
And of course there's solid state involved in all cases.


Outside the Netherlands, 1% would seem reasonable, if only because
tubed mic amps are very expensive, not everyone likes them, and a vast
amount of recorded music is made in 'project studios' which are lucky
to see a discrete transistor, never mind a tube!


OTOH there are a lot of lowish cost tubed mics available for and used
in project studios.

Ian

--
Ian Bell

Stewart Pinkerton said:

Aside from when you *want* to alter the input signal, just exactly
when are valves *ever* suitable for the purpose?

When they sound better than SS amps to that particular user.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Stewart Pinkerton said:

Outside the Netherlands, 1% would seem reasonable, if only because
tubed mic amps are very expensive, not everyone likes them, and a vast
amount of recorded music is made in 'project studios' which are lucky
to see a discrete transistor, never mind a tube!

Is *that* the reason why most modern music sounds like crap?

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

In article ,
François Yves Le Gal wrote:
All pro studios I'm familiar with have a very wide assortment of valve
mics, vintage or recent, which are put to very good use for a very large
number of recordings.

Define what they are particularly suited for?

Maybe the situation is different in your part of the Outer Hebrides.

You can tell where I live by my sig. And yes, many studios do still have
valve mics. But in common use?

--
*If you lived in your car, you'd be home by now *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

Me too - and I like it to bear the closest possible relationship to
what was on the master tape...............

Assuming the original recording wasn't screwed up.

So you think you can improve the average 'screwed up' master by using a
valve pre-amp? Does it cure world poverty as well?

It can make certain recordings more listenable.
Valve power amps may do the same, depending on room, speakers,
auxiliary equipment and recording.
In some instances I like my KT88 PP in triode amps better, in some
instances I like the hybrid (E288CC driving 2 pairs of SJ50/SK135).
Sometimes I even haul an old Denon amp (POA4400) in and have a good
time.

I always listen to repaired amps as well, so I get plenty of
opportunity to listen to almost everything that's on the market and
good enough to warrant repair.

As I still do some recording and mastering, I *do* know how definitive
masters can sound.
Maybe it's just me, but most of them are different from the market
releases. Usually, afterwards some producer honcho screws up all the
niceties me and my fellow recording engineers managed to capture.

The decline of quality in recording/mastering ( and music!)
surprisingly parallels the development of "better" digital tools and
formats. Coincidence?

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

All pro studios I'm familiar with have a very wide assortment of valve
mics, vintage or recent, which are put to very good use for a very large
number of recordings.

Define what they are particularly suited for?

Sometimes audio *is* art. Get used to it.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:30:50 +0100, BrritSki
wrote:

Right, I asked politely - maybe you'll hear this:

**** OFF YOU CROSS-POSTING TW@ !

That might have some meaning if you mentioned from where *you* are
cross-posting, you lamebrained ****....................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:13:52 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

The decline of quality in recording/mastering ( and music!)
surprisingly parallels the development of "better" digital tools and
formats. Coincidence?

Bull****. Some of the worst mastering *ever* perpetrated, took place
in the early to mid '70s, long before CD was launched, and before
there were any digital mixing desks.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:
As I still do some recording and mastering, I *do* know how definitive
masters can sound.
Maybe it's just me, but most of them are different from the market
releases. Usually, afterwards some producer honcho screws up all the
niceties me and my fellow recording engineers managed to capture.

The decline of quality in recording/mastering ( and music!)
surprisingly parallels the development of "better" digital tools and
formats. Coincidence?

Studio 'masters' have near always been re-mastered for the final product -
very much so in vinyl days. It was often essential to alter them, as what
would record fine on tape wouldn't necessarily transfer to disc. With CD,
there is no technical need.

--
*Caution: I drive like you do.

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

In article ,
Sander deWaal wrote:
All pro studios I'm familiar with have a very wide assortment of
valve mics, vintage or recent, which are put to very good use for a
very large number of recordings.

Define what they are particularly suited for?

Sometimes audio *is* art. Get used to it.

So I'll take it you don't know?

--
*Rehab is for quitters.

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

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:05:13 +0100, Ian Bell
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:01:04 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Outside the Netherlands, 1% would seem reasonable, if only because
tubed mic amps are very expensive, not everyone likes them, and a vast
amount of recorded music is made in 'project studios' which are lucky
to see a discrete transistor, never mind a tube!

OTOH there are a lot of lowish cost tubed mics available for and used
in project studios.

There's always crap trying to cash in on a fad...............

They do *not* sound like a valved Neumann, or an STC 3048....
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:32:32 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton said:

Outside the Netherlands, 1% would seem reasonable, if only because
tubed mic amps are very expensive, not everyone likes them, and a vast
amount of recorded music is made in 'project studios' which are lucky
to see a discrete transistor, never mind a tube!

Is *that* the reason why most modern music sounds like crap?

Nope, that's because it's now very easy to achieve studio-quality
results on a tight budget, and some people assume that this is a
substitute for talent and experience..................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:16:02 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" said:

All pro studios I'm familiar with have a very wide assortment of valve
mics, vintage or recent, which are put to very good use for a very large
number of recordings.

Define what they are particularly suited for?

Sometimes audio *is* art. Get used to it.

Recording isn't 'audio', it's still part of the performance. Exactly
why else do you think studios keep a *selection* of microphones?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering