At 02:02 PM 6/25/2005, Goran Finnberg wrote:
>Richard Hess:
> > I do see energy above 20kHz on some early 1970s
> > tapes of carousel-type band organs when their
> > little shrill bells go off.
>I donīt doubt that, though I wonder how much of that is clean signal and
>how much is pure distortion because something in the chain couldnīt
>handle the very steep rise of HF level?

I don't know and I've got to get through many 
transfers before I spend lots of time playing.

>BTW, this incistense that greater than 44.1 is needed for anything done
>seriously is imo a truly moot point.

I know. Clients like it though.

I wonder what the originator of this thread uses 
for tape playback? Right now my band organ tape 
(yet another) is coming off my A810 (shares heads 
and electronics modules with your A820s). Right 
now I still have the stock transformer line amps 
in my production A810s, but recently bought some 
transformerless ones that will go in shortly.

>Of FAR greater audible impact is the product of force and mass ie my
>Stax Lambda Pro headphones with the SRM-1/MK2 driver sounds head and
>shoulders above any electrodynamic headphone ever made.
>The same VERY audible difference can be heard between an AKG D224E dual
>element dynamic mic flat to 20 kHz compared to a Neumann KM84 capacitor
>mic so frequency responce while of some importance simply cannot compete
>with a truly proper reproduction of the musical onset transient which
>the electrostatic principle do in a way that makes my AKG K240DF sound
>wooly and impactless.

Right, and my Mackie HR-824s which apparently 
compare favorably to Magneplanars (by a 
self-described "audiot" friend) sound head and 
shoulders above my AKG K240DFs in terms of 
definition __in my new room__ that was designed 
by me, but with significant input from a 
nameless, but well-known, acoustician. The good 
points are his, the mistakes are mine.

>So much for frequency response.

I adopted using almost exclusively capacitor mics 
in the 1970s - though I stayed with AKGs. The 
early C451s (before they added the ugly peak) 
sounded very good and were a third the price of 
the Neumanns. I only own one dynamic, a 
Sennheiser MD 421 I do have a TLM103 a pair of 
414B/ULSs (not my fave) several C451s (6?) and a 
pair of MKH416Ts. If I were to do serious 
recording, I think I'd get a pair of DPA omnis, 
but only if I was recording in great acoustics that I wanted to capture.

Yes, I can hear the difference, and I prefer 
small-diaphragm mics to larger diaphragm mics 
(though I have both). However, when you take the 
transient response that we both love and measure 
the frequency components needed to pass the 
transient, don't we see some >20kHz energy? In 
other words, isn't that transient waveshape modified if we brickwall at 20kHz?

That goes back to why there are controlled rise 
times in the video measurement pulses (at least 
here in NTSC land). They are not just pure square 
waves. And the video bandwidth of some of the 
early Image Orthicon cameras was in the 9-10 MHz 
region which was why they looked gorgeous (and 
detailed) in the studio and less so after a 4.5 
MHz transmission channel (your numbers will be a 
bit different, but the same idea).



Richard L. Hess                           email: [log in to unmask]
Media                           web:
Aurora, Ontario, Canada             (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
Detailed contact information: