Re: Thanks...

Posted by Fretless (A) on April 21, 2007 at 19:44:45

In Reply to: Thanks... posted by kurt s on April 21, 2007 at 18:46:49:

Another very interesting post, and I thank you for taking the time.

"Maybe listening stright from the master tape with no turntable would be less enjoyable for you than having the turntable do some "processing" for you."

I really don't know, but it's possible. I do have a lot of studio time under my belt, and there is often something dry and analytical about the sound of the master tape in a studio environment, but that's mainly because of the ruthless near-field monitoring systems involved. I've never heard a master tape in my system - just CD-R copies, which usually sound okay, but never great, due to the nature of my CDP...and the fact that they're digital copies : ) - and I've never compared the tape to an LP.

"This is no insult, either. I like to process my sound with single ended triode amps. I think they make it sound more organic than anything push-pull, tubes or anything else.

No insult taken. I like SETs too.

"Maybe, perhaps, I would buy an SME 20 if I could afford it. I think it makes it sound more like putting on a reel-to-reel master tape than anything else I've heard." and "Then send it through a SET amp and it sounds the best to me."

I'm a big fan of well-suspended TTs, and from the way that you describe the 20, that 'table in an SET/horn system would probably be quite spectacular, though maybe a bit ruthless?

"There's no thinking of rhythm and pace to me when you listen to a reel-to-reel. It's just the recording and nothing more."

I think this is an extremely important point. The whole PRaT issue is subtractive once the music is set to tape. No audio gizmo "has" PRaT, but they all screw with it to a greater or lesser extent.

OTOH, I have heard master recordings involving my own playing where the recorder tripped over some of the band's timing subtleties - and I'm in a position to know! Coincidence or not, whenever a master had demonstrably corrupted timing, it was always some kind of hard drive; never analog tape in my experience.

Got a gig tonight, so I won't be replying anymore 'till tomorrow.

Thanks again for the interesting insights.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - jaybar 07:09:07 04/20/07 (18)

I'd like to think I've moved past the platter as interface? - Elmo 05:19:45 04/21/07 (0)

A problem with acrylic - Mark Kelly 19:10:06 04/20/07 (0)

If willing to dig around a bit, try the Teres Audio and Galibier websites - travisty 15:45:06 04/20/07 (0)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - Fretless 09:39:16 04/20/07 (13)

All materials do - cbrady 23:14:41 04/20/07 (0)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - kurt s 14:48:11 04/20/07 (8)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - Fretless 15:38:09 04/20/07 (7)

Just as a data point for me... - kurt s 20:21:58 04/20/07 (3)

Re: Just as a data point for me... - Fretless 18:10:17 04/21/07 (2)

Thanks... - kurt s 18:46:49 04/21/07 (1)

Re: Thanks... - Fretless 19:44:45 04/21/07 (0)

Pace and drive - violinist3 18:58:34 04/20/07 (2)

Re: Pace and drive - Fretless 16:49:35 04/21/07 (1)

Thanks - violinist3 17:16:03 04/21/07 (0)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - Tre' 10:29:42 04/20/07 (2)

Pure acrylic is a bit too dead. Acrylic/lead shot can be pretty good. nt - kurt s 14:50:16 04/20/07 (0)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - Fretless 11:21:43 04/20/07 (0)

Re: Do Acrylic Platters, as a meterial, have any type of sonic signature? - Pat S. 08:17:02 04/20/07 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: Thanks... - Fretless 19:44:45 04/21/07 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.