On 13/04/2022 12:34 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 11:00 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 10:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 10:24 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 7:23 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 10:12 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey Trev,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part
>>>>>>>> for an
>>>>>>>> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in
>>>>>>>> England,
>>>>>>>> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I
>>>>>>>> recently
>>>>>>>> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my
>>>>>>>> kid as a
>>>>>>>> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and
>>>>>>>> would love
>>>>>>>> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are
>>>>>>>> cool.
>>>>>>>> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and
>>>>>>>> sounds great
>>>>>>>> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
>>>>>>>> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short
>>>>>>>> "manual" type
>>>>>>>> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>>>>>>> Just to chuck in my two cents worth you really should convince him
>>>>>>> that automatic turntables aren't the way to go however cool they
>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>> appear at this point in time.  The majority of them were junk
>>>>>>> even in
>>>>>>> their heyday and aside from the sound quality not being up to
>>>>>>> scratch
>>>>>>> (pun intended) they can seriously affect the life of records.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> yes that turntable has a ceramic cartridge
>>>>> Which is but a small part of its problems, Garrard did however make
>>>>> decent stand alone turntables which were popular among enthusiasts
>>>>> back in the vinyl era.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> If he only intends playing old (and well worn) records go for it
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>> otherwise best not encourage him down that path.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> first he needs a good turntable and magnetic cartridge with an
>>>>>> elliptical stylus for good sound quality and not to damage the
>>>>>> records.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    If he ever gets
>>>>>>> really keen he'll also be wanting a valve amplifier
>>>>>> otherwise any good amp will suffice
>>>>> On the assumption he'll want to stick with vintage stuff a Williamson
>>>>> valve amp is what he'll probably aspire to (they date from the 1950s
>>>>> IIRC).  Many of today's vinyl fans still don't like solid state amps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> valve amps are still being produced for idiots, who have more money
>>>> than sense.
>>>
>>> **There, I fixed your statement for you.
>>>
>>
>> LOL. I have no experience with them but supposedly they provide a
>> 'warmer' sound which brings out the 'qualities' of vynl, or so the
>> hype goes.
>
> **Some do, some don't. It depends on the technology and topology
> chosen by the designer. The valve amps that would 'warm', do so
> because they lack a good frequency response at the extremes. Here is
> the frequency response of a 'perfect' amplifier (Fig.1):
>
> https://www.stereophile.com/content/boulder-amplifiers-2150-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements
>
>
> Note the black line (which is buried among the other lines). That
> represents the frequency response of a 'perfect' amplifier, when
> operating into a simulated loudspeaker.
>
> Here is a valve amp (Fig.3):
>
> https://www.stereophile.com/content/cary-audio-cad-805rs-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements
>
>
> Note the black line.
>
> The graphs indicate the audibility of the flaws within an amplifier.
> The flatter that black line is, the better.
>
>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> and a couple of
>>>>>>> Quad electrostatic speakers as well unless he finally realises that
>>>>>>> the base is shithouse (read absent).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> do they still make them? plenty of other/better speakers
>>>>>> available now
>>>>> Even by modern standards their performance was superb.  No idea if
>>>>> they're still made but back in the days of my youth any of the
>>>>> audiophiles I knew either owned or wanted one (stereo didn't much
>>>>> interest any of them even in the 1970s).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> lack of base was their biggest drawback (as you previously noted)
>>>
>>> **"Base" (sic) was OK, but efficiency and the ability to go loud
>>> were their biggest stumbling blocks. The bass response was actually
>>> not siginficantly inferior to most speakers of the time (1950s),
>>> when the Quad ESL57 was released. By the 1970s, the Quads were
>>> roughly equal to a good quality bookshelf speaker, though, of
>>> course, the Quads occupied considerably more real estate.
>>>
>>> Always remember that the Quad ESL57 was released and sold as a
>>> single speaker, since stereo had yet to be invented. For such an
>>> ancient speaker system, it still offers an astonishing result.
>>>
>>> https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/bbc-dip-does-it-sound-like-quad-esl57.238529/
>>>
>>
>>
>> mono audio predates my experience in the industry.
>
> **Moon Audio products are over-priced, over-hyped shit.
>
>  but this discussion
>> has reminded me of JVC's failed attempt to make 4 channel the
>> standard for analog music reproduction. now of course we have seven
>> channel audio, but due solely due to digital audio.
>
> **Well, we have multi-channel audio for a host of reasons, including:
>
> * Costs have fallen significantly.
> * Technology has improved, allowing true surround sound to be attained.
> * Manufacturers saw sales of stereo starting to fall and needed people
> to spend money on the 'next big thing'.
>

yes but we don't have 4 channel record players anymore

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!

Yosemite Sam wrote:
>
>valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists

Maybe not for much longer. No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
bought were made in Russia!

--
John H

On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
> Maybe not for much longer. No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
> bought were made in Russia!
>

clocky collects vintage valve radios I believe. perhaps keep in mind as
a source to buy or sell

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!

On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 12:34 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 11:00 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 10:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 10:24 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 7:23 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 10:12 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>>>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hey Trev,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part
>>>>>>>>> for an
>>>>>>>>> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in
>>>>>>>>> England,
>>>>>>>>> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I
>>>>>>>>> recently
>>>>>>>>> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my
>>>>>>>>> kid as a
>>>>>>>>> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and
>>>>>>>>> would love
>>>>>>>>> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are
>>>>>>>>> cool.
>>>>>>>>> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and
>>>>>>>>> sounds great
>>>>>>>>> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
>>>>>>>>> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short
>>>>>>>>> "manual" type
>>>>>>>>> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>>>>>>>> Just to chuck in my two cents worth you really should convince him
>>>>>>>> that automatic turntables aren't the way to go however cool they
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>> appear at this point in time.  The majority of them were junk
>>>>>>>> even in
>>>>>>>> their heyday and aside from the sound quality not being up to
>>>>>>>> scratch
>>>>>>>> (pun intended) they can seriously affect the life of records.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes that turntable has a ceramic cartridge
>>>>>> Which is but a small part of its problems, Garrard did however make
>>>>>> decent stand alone turntables which were popular among enthusiasts
>>>>>> back in the vinyl era.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If he only intends playing old (and well worn) records go for it
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> otherwise best not encourage him down that path.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> first he needs a good turntable and magnetic cartridge with an
>>>>>>> elliptical stylus for good sound quality and not to damage the
>>>>>>> records.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    If he ever gets
>>>>>>>> really keen he'll also be wanting a valve amplifier
>>>>>>> otherwise any good amp will suffice
>>>>>> On the assumption he'll want to stick with vintage stuff a Williamson
>>>>>> valve amp is what he'll probably aspire to (they date from the 1950s
>>>>>> IIRC).  Many of today's vinyl fans still don't like solid state amps.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for idiots, who have more money
>>>>> than sense.
>>>>
>>>> **There, I fixed your statement for you.
>>>>
>>>
>>> LOL. I have no experience with them but supposedly they provide a
>>> 'warmer' sound which brings out the 'qualities' of vynl, or so the
>>> hype goes.
>>
>> **Some do, some don't. It depends on the technology and topology
>> chosen by the designer. The valve amps that would 'warm', do so
>> because they lack a good frequency response at the extremes. Here is
>> the frequency response of a 'perfect' amplifier (Fig.1):
>>
>> https://www.stereophile.com/content/boulder-amplifiers-2150-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements
>>
>>
>> Note the black line (which is buried among the other lines). That
>> represents the frequency response of a 'perfect' amplifier, when
>> operating into a simulated loudspeaker.
>>
>> Here is a valve amp (Fig.3):
>>
>> https://www.stereophile.com/content/cary-audio-cad-805rs-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements
>>
>>
>> Note the black line.
>>
>> The graphs indicate the audibility of the flaws within an amplifier.
>> The flatter that black line is, the better.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and a couple of
>>>>>>>> Quad electrostatic speakers as well unless he finally realises that
>>>>>>>> the base is shithouse (read absent).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> do they still make them? plenty of other/better speakers
>>>>>>> available now
>>>>>> Even by modern standards their performance was superb.  No idea if
>>>>>> they're still made but back in the days of my youth any of the
>>>>>> audiophiles I knew either owned or wanted one (stereo didn't much
>>>>>> interest any of them even in the 1970s).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> lack of base was their biggest drawback (as you previously noted)
>>>>
>>>> **"Base" (sic) was OK, but efficiency and the ability to go loud
>>>> were their biggest stumbling blocks. The bass response was actually
>>>> not siginficantly inferior to most speakers of the time (1950s),
>>>> when the Quad ESL57 was released. By the 1970s, the Quads were
>>>> roughly equal to a good quality bookshelf speaker, though, of
>>>> course, the Quads occupied considerably more real estate.
>>>>
>>>> Always remember that the Quad ESL57 was released and sold as a
>>>> single speaker, since stereo had yet to be invented. For such an
>>>> ancient speaker system, it still offers an astonishing result.
>>>>
>>>> https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/bbc-dip-does-it-sound-like-quad-esl57.238529/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> mono audio predates my experience in the industry.
>>
>> **Moon Audio products are over-priced, over-hyped shit.
>>
>>  but this discussion
>>> has reminded me of JVC's failed attempt to make 4 channel the
>>> standard for analog music reproduction. now of course we have seven
>>> channel audio, but due solely due to digital audio.
>>
>> **Well, we have multi-channel audio for a host of reasons, including:
>>
>> * Costs have fallen significantly.
>> * Technology has improved, allowing true surround sound to be attained.
>> * Manufacturers saw sales of stereo starting to fall and needed people
>> to spend money on the 'next big thing'.
>>
>
> yes but we don't have 4 channel record players anymore
>
>

**Correct. That's down to several things:

* Discrete 4 channel LP equipment was expensive and, after a few plays
of the LP, the carrier frequency was pretty much destroyed by the
stylus. SQ and QS systems were highly flawed, sound-wise and the whole
thing collapsed in a heap by the mid-1970s. Besides that, for standard
music, 2 channels is all you need.

On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>
>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>
> Maybe not for much longer. No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
> bought were made in Russia!
>

**Yep. There was a run on Russian valves at my local supplier a few
weeks back. I understand that they are sold out of most popular types.
One customer dropped $40k on a shipment. China is the other major source
of valves, but Chinese valves do not enjoy a good reputation. Of late,
the quality of Russian valves has also taken a hit. Which is why my
favourite power valve, the mighty (UK made) KT88, which I used to pay
$25.00 for, back in the early 1970s, now sells for almost a Grand. The
original KT88s would last for years in an amp. Chinese ones last a few
months. If that.

[Aside] One of my tech instructors was a retired engineer, who was
involved in the design of the KT88.

On 13/04/2022 11:43 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 12:07 pm, Clocky wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 9:00 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 10:34 am, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 10:24 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 7:23 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 10:12 am, John_H wrote:
>>>>>>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hey Trev,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part
>>>>>>>>> for an
>>>>>>>>> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in
>>>>>>>>> England,
>>>>>>>>> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I
>>>>>>>>> recently
>>>>>>>>> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my
>>>>>>>>> kid as a
>>>>>>>>> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and
>>>>>>>>> would love
>>>>>>>>> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are
>>>>>>>>> cool.
>>>>>>>>> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and
>>>>>>>>> sounds great
>>>>>>>>> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
>>>>>>>>> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short
>>>>>>>>> "manual" type
>>>>>>>>> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>>>>>>>> Just to chuck in my two cents worth you really should convince him
>>>>>>>> that automatic turntables aren't the way to go however cool they
>>>>>>>> may
>>>>>>>> appear at this point in time.  The majority of them were junk
>>>>>>>> even in
>>>>>>>> their heyday and aside from the sound quality not being up to
>>>>>>>> scratch
>>>>>>>> (pun intended) they can seriously affect the life of records.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes that turntable has a ceramic cartridge
>>>>>> Which is but a small part of its problems, Garrard did however make
>>>>>> decent stand alone turntables which were popular among enthusiasts
>>>>>> back in the vinyl era.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If he only intends playing old (and well worn) records go for it
>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> otherwise best not encourage him down that path.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> first he needs a good turntable and magnetic cartridge with an
>>>>>>> elliptical stylus for good sound quality and not to damage the
>>>>>>> records.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    If he ever gets
>>>>>>>> really keen he'll also be wanting a valve amplifier
>>>>>>> otherwise any good amp will suffice
>>>>>> On the assumption he'll want to stick with vintage stuff a Williamson
>>>>>> valve amp is what he'll probably aspire to (they date from the 1950s
>>>>>> IIRC).  Many of today's vinyl fans still don't like solid state amps.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for idiots, who have more money
>>>>> than sense.
>>>>
>>>> **There, I fixed your statement for you.
>>>>
>>>
>>> LOL. I have no experience with them but supposedly they provide a
>>> 'warmer' sound which brings out the 'qualities' of vynl, or so the
>>> hype goes.
>>>
>>
>> Well they do sound different, but different isn't necessarily better.
>
>
> ppl will spend their $$$ on whatever floats their boat
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and a couple of
>>>>>>>> Quad electrostatic speakers as well unless he finally realises that
>>>>>>>> the base is shithouse (read absent).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> do they still make them? plenty of other/better speakers
>>>>>>> available now
>>>>>> Even by modern standards their performance was superb.  No idea if
>>>>>> they're still made but back in the days of my youth any of the
>>>>>> audiophiles I knew either owned or wanted one (stereo didn't much
>>>>>> interest any of them even in the 1970s).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> lack of base was their biggest drawback (as you previously noted)
>>>>
>>>> **"Bass was OK, but efficiency and the ability to go loud were their
>>>> biggest stumbling blocks. The bass response was actually not
>>>> siginficantly inferior to most speakers of the time (1950s), when
>>>> the Quad ESL57 was released. By the 1970s, the Quads were roughly
>>>> equal to a good quality bookshelf speaker, though, of course, the
>>>> Quads occupied considerably more real estate.
>>>>
>>>> Always remember that the Quad ESL57 was released and sold as a
>>>> single speaker, since stereo had yet to be invented. For such an
>>>> ancient speaker system, it still offers an astonishing result.
>>>>
>>>> https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/bbc-dip-does-it-sound-like-quad-esl57.238529/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> mono audio predates my experience in the industry. but this
>>> discussion has reminded me of JVC's failed attempt to make 4 channel
>>> the standard for analog music reproduction. now of course we have
>>> seven channel audio, but due solely due to digital audio.
>>>
>>
>> It's a bit of a gimmick in itself.
>>
>
> well, not for movies with a good AV system. I just use 5.1 , 4 speakers
> and a sub. that works well in an average size room. except I supplement
> the two main (large) speakers with two additional smaller ones. but
> nowdays soundbars are more popular. I haven't heard any but I doubt the
> same effect can be produced from a single source, although they do have
> a sub.
>

Yes, works well for movies.

--
keith on the 7 Oct 2021 wrote;
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if
it is unproven, he is lying."

On 13/04/2022 11:55 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>> bought were made in Russia!
>>
>
> clocky collects vintage valve radios I believe. perhaps keep in mind as
> a source to buy or sell
>

I don't collect them perse but I have a few collected over the years. I
don't have anything to sell and I'm not in the market to buy anymore
either. Last valves I bought were NOS but modern replacements, where
available, are Chinese/Russian shit.

--
keith on the 7 Oct 2021 wrote;
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if
it is unproven, he is lying."

On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>
>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>
> Maybe not for much longer. No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
> bought were made in Russia!

They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 13/04/2022 12:12 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>
>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>
>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>> bought were made in Russia!
>>
>
> **Yep. There was a run on Russian valves at my local supplier a few
> weeks back. I understand that they are sold out of most popular types.
> One customer dropped $40k on a shipment. China is the other major source
> of valves, but Chinese valves do not enjoy a good reputation. Of late,
> the quality of Russian valves has also taken a hit. Which is why my
> favourite power valve, the mighty (UK made) KT88, which I used to pay
> $25.00 for, back in the early 1970s, now sells for almost a Grand.

You can buy Slovakian ones for much less. Brand Snobbery costs the
audiophool plenty more though.

--
keith on the 7 Oct 2021 wrote;
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if
it is unproven, he is lying."

On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>
>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>
>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>> bought were made in Russia!
>
> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>
>
>

**LOL! We can only hope.

There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves could
cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than transistors
and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for so long. I
suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a truly viable
semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from somewhere else.
That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in military equipment has
long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably since, at least, the
mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the same with their stuff.
Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate with valves. Not only are
they mechanically too fragile, but they're way too slow and way too
primitive.

FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build a
valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3 storey
house. And, of course, the size of the electronics is such that signal
propagation would be too slow for such a CD player to work. And, don't
forget: CD player technology was released to the public in 1983. Which
means the technology was likely sorted out by 1981-ish. Computer
technology is millions of times more powerful and thousands of times
faster today.

On 13/04/2022 2:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>
>>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>>
>>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>>> bought were made in Russia!
>>
>> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>>
>>
>>
>
> **LOL! We can only hope.
>
> There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves could
> cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than transistors
> and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for so long. I
> suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a truly viable
> semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from somewhere else.
> That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in military equipment has
> long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably since, at least, the
> mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the same with their stuff.
> Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate with valves. Not only are
> they mechanically too fragile, but they're way too slow and way too
> primitive.
>
> FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build a
> valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3 storey
> house.

Large sections of a valve CD player have been done including a valve
DAC. It wouldn't even take up a small room.
--
keith on the 7 Oct 2021 wrote;
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if
it is unproven, he is lying."

On 13/04/2022 6:28 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 2:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>>>
>>>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>>>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>>>> bought were made in Russia!
>>>
>>> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **LOL! We can only hope.
>>
>> There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves
>> could cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than
>> transistors and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for so
>> long. I suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a truly
>> viable semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from
>> somewhere else. That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in
>> military equipment has long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably
>> since, at least, the mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the same
>> with their stuff. Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate with
>> valves. Not only are they mechanically too fragile, but they're way
>> too slow and way too primitive.
>>
>> FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build a
>> valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3 storey
>> house.
>
> Large sections of a valve CD player have been done including a valve
> DAC. It wouldn't even take up a small room.

**Bullshit. A big part of the DAC is memory. I'd have to check my texts,
but I recall the memory amounts to several 10s of kB. Each bit of memory
requires at least 3 valve elements. CD players operate with 16 bit
'words'. Stereo, is double that. That's a fuck-load of valves. And that
is just the memory. The actual converter requires more valve elements
again. Then, of course, are the control systems for the laser. These
require the use of several, high speed feedback systems, in order to
control laser focussing and tracking. To accomplish this with valves
would require (my best guess) several hundred valves. And again; The big
problem arises with the size and propagation delays of the various
digital signals. Valves occupy way too much space.

The last valve computer ever built (BRLESC) used 1,727 valves (and 853
transistors - so it kind of cheated) and was far too slow to deal with
the data generated in a cheap CD player. It was HUGE.

So-called "valve CD players", are really just regular CD players, using
solid state DACs and a valve output stage.

On 13/04/2022 5:53 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 6:28 pm, Clocky wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 2:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>>>>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>>>>> bought were made in Russia!
>>>>
>>>> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> **LOL! We can only hope.
>>>
>>> There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves
>>> could cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than
>>> transistors and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for so
>>> long. I suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a truly
>>> viable semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from
>>> somewhere else. That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in
>>> military equipment has long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably
>>> since, at least, the mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the
>>> same with their stuff. Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate
>>> with valves. Not only are they mechanically too fragile, but they're
>>> way too slow and way too primitive.
>>>
>>> FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build
>>> a valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3
>>> storey house.
>>
>> Large sections of a valve CD player have been done including a valve
>> DAC. It wouldn't even take up a small room.
>
> **Bullshit.

Nope.

A big part of the DAC is memory. I'd have to check my texts,
> but I recall the memory amounts to several 10s of kB. Each bit of memory
> requires at least 3 valve elements. CD players operate with 16 bit
> 'words'. Stereo, is double that.

Some early CD players were 14 bit.

That's a fuck-load of valves. And that
> is just the memory. The actual converter requires more valve elements
> again. Then, of course, are the control systems for the laser. These
> require the use of several, high speed feedback systems, in order to
> control laser focussing and tracking. To accomplish this with valves
> would require (my best guess) several hundred valves. And again; The big
> problem arises with the size and propagation delays of the various
> digital signals. Valves occupy way too much space.
>
> The last valve computer ever built (BRLESC) used 1,727 valves (and 853
> transistors - so it kind of cheated) and was far too slow to deal with
> the data generated in a cheap CD player. It was HUGE.
>

Also irrelevant.

> So-called "valve CD players", are really just regular CD players, using
> solid state DACs and a valve output stage.

Nope that's not what I am talking about, those just use valves on the
output stage. You're way overthinking it.
There are different ways to to digital to analog conversion that don't
require computing power.

--
keith on the 7 Oct 2021 wrote;
"He asserts that the claim is true, so, if
it is unproven, he is lying."

On 13/04/2022 2:12 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>
>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>
>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>> bought were made in Russia!
>>
>
> **Yep. There was a run on Russian valves at my local supplier a few
> weeks back. I understand that they are sold out of most popular types.
> One customer dropped $40k on a shipment. China is the other major source
> of valves, but Chinese valves do not enjoy a good reputation. Of late,
> the quality of Russian valves has also taken a hit. Which is why my
> favourite power valve, the mighty (UK made) KT88, which I used to pay
> $25.00 for, back in the early 1970s, now sells for almost a Grand. The
> original KT88s would last for years in an amp. Chinese ones last a few
> months. If that.

Shows that you shouldn't chuck anything, I had a few of them, but got
rid of them some years ago, couldn't see any use for them at the time.

> [Aside] One of my tech instructors was a retired engineer, who was
> involved in the design of the KT88.

On 13/04/2022 7:53 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 6:28 pm, Clocky wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 2:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps but I
>>>>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>>>>> bought were made in Russia!
>>>>
>>>> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> **LOL! We can only hope.
>>>
>>> There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves
>>> could cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than
>>> transistors and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for so
>>> long. I suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a truly
>>> viable semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from
>>> somewhere else. That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in
>>> military equipment has long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably
>>> since, at least, the mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the
>>> same with their stuff. Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate
>>> with valves. Not only are they mechanically too fragile, but they're
>>> way too slow and way too primitive.
>>>
>>> FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build
>>> a valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3
>>> storey house.
>>
>> Large sections of a valve CD player have been done including a valve
>> DAC. It wouldn't even take up a small room.
>
> **Bullshit. A big part of the DAC is memory. I'd have to check my texts,
> but I recall the memory amounts to several 10s of kB. Each bit of memory
> requires at least 3 valve elements. CD players operate with 16 bit
> 'words'. Stereo, is double that. That's a fuck-load of valves. And that
> is just the memory. The actual converter requires more valve elements
> again. Then, of course, are the control systems for the laser. These
> require the use of several, high speed feedback systems, in order to
> control laser focussing and tracking. To accomplish this with valves
> would require (my best guess) several hundred valves. And again; The big
> problem arises with the size and propagation delays of the various
> digital signals. Valves occupy way too much space.

You could use a core stack, but it would probably be too slow.

> The last valve computer ever built (BRLESC) used 1,727 valves (and 853
> transistors - so it kind of cheated) and was far too slow to deal with
> the data generated in a cheap CD player. It was HUGE.
>
> So-called "valve CD players", are really just regular CD players, using
> solid state DACs and a valve output stage.

Like guitar amps that have a single valve stage.

On 12/04/2022 1:27 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 12/04/2022 9:06 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>> On 12/04/2022 10:12 am, John_H wrote:
>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>> Hey Trev,
>>>>
>>>> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part for an
>>>> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>>>>
>>>> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in England,
>>>> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I
>>>> recently
>>>> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my kid as a
>>>> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and would love
>>>> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are cool.
>>>> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and sounds great
>>>> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
>>>> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short "manual"
>>>> type
>>>> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>>> Just to chuck in my two cents worth you really should convince him
>>> that automatic turntables aren't the way to go however cool they may
>>> appear at this point in time.  The majority of them were junk even in
>>> their heyday and aside from the sound quality not being up to scratch
>>> (pun intended) they can seriously affect the life of records.
>>
>>
>> yes that turntable has a ceramic cartridge
>>
>>
>>>
>>> If he only intends playing old (and well worn) records go for it but
>>> otherwise best not encourage him down that path.
>>
>>
>> first he needs a good turntable and magnetic cartridge with an
>> elliptical stylus for good sound quality and not to damage the records.
>>
>>
>>>   If he ever gets
>>> really keen he'll also be wanting a valve amplifier
>>
>> otherwise any good amp will suffice
>>
>>
>>> and a couple of
>>> Quad electrostatic speakers as well unless he finally realises that
>>> the base is shithouse (read absent).
>>
>>
>> do they still make them? plenty of other/better speakers available now
>>
>>
>>>
>>> FWIW I gave on vinyl with the first appearance of affordable CD
>>> players but I'm aware there's still a lot of vinyl fans around and by
>>> all accounts there's some excellent turntables still available in
>>> today's market.  If I were a vinyl fan buying records at today's
>>> prices I'd also be looking to record them on tape via a decent
>>> turntable for normal listening.
>>
>>
>> yes recording LP's is the way to go, then just store the records
>>
>>
>
> I recorded my Dire Straits Brothers in Arms vinyl to CD. Only way to go
> if you intend to actually listen to an "vinyl" album on a regular basis.

What did that achieve? The whole point of vinyl (if you're into that
sort of thing) is to have a purely analog system, converting it to a CD
just gives a rather poorer version of having it on a CD in the first
place. The only reason that I can see is to avoid the cost of buying the
CD.

The recording of "Brothers in arms" was actually one of the first all
digital recordings, so even if it is listened to on vinyl, it is still
from a digital master.

It was the first CD that I bought, I couldn't wait to get away from the
hisses and pops of vinyl records.

On 17/4/2022 10:48 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 12/04/2022 1:27 pm, Clocky wrote:
>> On 12/04/2022 9:06 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>> On 12/04/2022 10:12 am, John_H wrote:
>>>> Noddy wrote:
>>>>> Hey Trev,
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part for an
>>>>> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>>>>>
>>>>> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in England,
>>>>> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I
>>>>> recently
>>>>> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my kid
>>>>> as a
>>>>> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and would
>>>>> love
>>>>> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are cool.
>>>>> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and sounds
>>>>> great
>>>>> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
>>>>> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short "manual"
>>>>> type
>>>>> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>>>> Just to chuck in my two cents worth you really should convince him
>>>> that automatic turntables aren't the way to go however cool they may
>>>> appear at this point in time.  The majority of them were junk even in
>>>> their heyday and aside from the sound quality not being up to scratch
>>>> (pun intended) they can seriously affect the life of records.
>>>
>>>
>>> yes that turntable has a ceramic cartridge
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If he only intends playing old (and well worn) records go for it but
>>>> otherwise best not encourage him down that path.
>>>
>>>
>>> first he needs a good turntable and magnetic cartridge with an
>>> elliptical stylus for good sound quality and not to damage the records.
>>>
>>>
>>>>   If he ever gets
>>>> really keen he'll also be wanting a valve amplifier
>>>
>>> otherwise any good amp will suffice
>>>
>>>
>>>> and a couple of
>>>> Quad electrostatic speakers as well unless he finally realises that
>>>> the base is shithouse (read absent).
>>>
>>>
>>> do they still make them? plenty of other/better speakers available now
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> FWIW I gave on vinyl with the first appearance of affordable CD
>>>> players but I'm aware there's still a lot of vinyl fans around and by
>>>> all accounts there's some excellent turntables still available in
>>>> today's market.  If I were a vinyl fan buying records at today's
>>>> prices I'd also be looking to record them on tape via a decent
>>>> turntable for normal listening.
>>>
>>>
>>> yes recording LP's is the way to go, then just store the records
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I recorded my Dire Straits Brothers in Arms vinyl to CD. Only way to
>> go if you intend to actually listen to an "vinyl" album on a regular
>> basis.
>
> What did that achieve? The whole point of vinyl (if you're into that
> sort of thing) is to have a purely analog system, converting it to a CD
> just gives a rather poorer version of having it on a CD in the first
> place. The only reason that I can see is to avoid the cost of buying the
> CD.
>
> The recording of "Brothers in arms" was actually one of the first all
> digital recordings, so even if it is listened to on vinyl, it is still
> from a digital master.
>
> It was the first CD that I bought, I couldn't wait to get away from the
> hisses and pops of vinyl records.
>
My exact thoughts when I went to CD from hissy tape and popping vinyl.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 17/04/2022 7:56 pm, keithr0 wrote:
> On 13/04/2022 7:53 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 13/04/2022 6:28 pm, Clocky wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2022 2:27 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 13/04/2022 4:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 1:49 pm, John_H wrote:
>>>>>> Yosemite Sam wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> valve amps are still being produced for audiophile purists
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe not for much longer.  No interest whatsoever in valve amps
>>>>>> but I
>>>>>> do confess to some interest in vintage radios and the last valves I
>>>>>> bought were made in Russia!
>>>>>
>>>>> They're probably still using valves for the avionics in their Migs....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> **LOL! We can only hope.
>>>>
>>>> There is some truth buried in there. It was discovered that valves
>>>> could cope with a nuclear EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pulse) better than
>>>> transistors and that was why the old Soviets stuck with valves for
>>>> so long. I suspect the truth was more prosaic. Russia has lacked a
>>>> truly viable semiconductor industry and buys most of it's stuff from
>>>> somewhere else. That said, I would suggest that semiconductors in
>>>> military equipment has long been 'hardened' against EMPs. Probably
>>>> since, at least, the mnid-1970s. The Russians would have done the
>>>> same with their stuff. Modern weapons systems simply cannot operate
>>>> with valves. Not only are they mechanically too fragile, but they're
>>>> way too slow and way too primitive.
>>>>
>>>> FWIW: I once did a thought experiment on what it would take to build
>>>> a valve CD player. The electronics required would FILL a large, 3
>>>> storey house.
>>>
>>> Large sections of a valve CD player have been done including a valve
>>> DAC. It wouldn't even take up a small room.
>>
>> **Bullshit. A big part of the DAC is memory. I'd have to check my
>> texts, but I recall the memory amounts to several 10s of kB. Each bit
>> of memory requires at least 3 valve elements. CD players operate with
>> 16 bit 'words'. Stereo, is double that. That's a fuck-load of valves.
>> And that is just the memory. The actual converter requires more valve
>> elements again. Then, of course, are the control systems for the
>> laser. These require the use of several, high speed feedback systems,
>> in order to control laser focussing and tracking. To accomplish this
>> with valves would require (my best guess) several hundred valves. And
>> again; The big problem arises with the size and propagation delays of
>> the various digital signals. Valves occupy way too much space.
>
> You could use a core stack, but it would probably be too slow.
>
>> The last valve computer ever built (BRLESC) used 1,727 valves (and 853
>> transistors - so it kind of cheated) and was far too slow to deal with
>> the data generated in a cheap CD player. It was HUGE.
>>
>> So-called "valve CD players", are really just regular CD players,
>> using solid state DACs and a valve output stage.
>
> Like guitar amps that have a single valve stage.

**Yep.

On 11/04/2022 10:33 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
> Hey Trev,
>
> Don't know if this is up your alley, but I'm looking for a part for an
> antique turntable and wondered if you could help.
>
> The turntable in question is a Garrard 3500 that was made in England,
> and the part I'm after is an auto loading spindle to suit it. I recently
> bought a "Rolls" 1970's era turntable and speaker suite for my kid as a
> birthday present as he's showing a big interest in vinyl and would love
> an old fashioned "auto load" record player which he thinks are cool.
> This one that I've bought for him is in mint condition and sounds great
> (to my rooted ears anyway) and while the auto function works it's
> missing the auto load spindle and only has a regular short "manual" type
> fitted  which actually prevents the auto function from operating.
>
> What I've been able to discover is that these spindles were common
> across a wide range of Garrard models, and while there is an outlet in
> the US that has them in stock for something like 12 bucks, they won't
> ship to Australia as the US Postal Service has a block on Australia at
> the moment for some reason.
>
> If you know where I might find one or can recommend somewhere to try I'd
> be eternally grateful.
>
>
>

**No luck with the auto changer spindle. The only Garrard I have kicking
around is a single play model. The others are BSRs and I don't think the
auto spindle will fit. Happy to post one down and you try it out, if you
wish though. Alternatively, I will be visiting the in-laws in a few
weeks and I will see what changers are fitted to their two stereos. They
are probably BSRs, but you never know.

On 18/04/2022 2:20 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 11/04/2022 10:33 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> If you know where I might find one or can recommend somewhere to try
>> I'd be eternally grateful.
>>
>>
>>
>
> **No luck with the auto changer spindle. The only Garrard I have kicking
> around is a single play model. The others are BSRs and I don't think the
> auto spindle will fit. Happy to post one down and you try it out, if you
> wish though. Alternatively, I will be visiting the in-laws in a few
> weeks and I will see what changers are fitted to their two stereos. They
> are probably BSRs, but you never know.

No worries Trevor. I appreciate you having a look.

His birthday is today and he was presented with the record player this
morning and is over the moon with it. He's also not bothered about the
fact that the auto load function isn't working, so it may have been a
case of worrying about nothing :)

Been working fine until around an hour ago when the arm suddenly started
darting across the record. I checked and there was some fluff attached
to it, but cleaning it hasn't helped. I think the stylus is rooted on
side 1 but it plays okay on side 2. It doesn't actually say, but it
looks like the second side might be for 78's. Not sure and I'll have to
order another one from somewhere.

Best that I can tell, the pickup cartridge is a Sonotone 9T. Dunno
whether that was standard for the turntable or not.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 18/04/2022 3:04 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 2:20 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 11/04/2022 10:33 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> If you know where I might find one or can recommend somewhere to try
>>> I'd be eternally grateful.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **No luck with the auto changer spindle. The only Garrard I have
>> kicking around is a single play model. The others are BSRs and I don't
>> think the auto spindle will fit. Happy to post one down and you try it
>> out, if you wish though. Alternatively, I will be visiting the in-laws
>> in a few weeks and I will see what changers are fitted to their two
>> stereos. They are probably BSRs, but you never know.
>
> No worries Trevor. I appreciate you having a look.
>
> His birthday is today and he was presented with the record player this
> morning and is over the moon with it. He's also not bothered about the
> fact that the auto load function isn't working, so it may have been a
> case of worrying about nothing :)
>
> Been working fine until around an hour ago when the arm suddenly started
> darting across the record. I checked and there was some fluff attached
> to it, but cleaning it hasn't helped. I think the stylus is rooted on
> side 1 but it plays okay on side 2. It doesn't actually say, but it
> looks like the second side might be for 78's. Not sure and I'll have to
> order another one from somewhere.
>
> Best that I can tell, the pickup cartridge is a Sonotone 9T. Dunno
> whether that was standard for the turntable or not.
>
>

**WARNING WILL ROBINSON. WARNING! DO NOT play LPs with a 78 stylus. You
WILL fuck the LP. Guaranteed.

Yes, skating across the LP is a sign that the stylus has been removed.

When you order a new stylus, get one with LP on both sides. Unless he
plays 78s.

You'll find what you need here:

https://www.wagneronline.com.au/stanfield-stylus-listing-catalogue/turntable-parts/service-repair-parts/2558/fl/

They post.

On 18/04/2022 3:28 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 3:04 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> Been working fine until around an hour ago when the arm suddenly
>> started darting across the record. I checked and there was some fluff
>> attached to it, but cleaning it hasn't helped. I think the stylus is
>> rooted on side 1 but it plays okay on side 2. It doesn't actually say,
>> but it looks like the second side might be for 78's. Not sure and I'll
>> have to order another one from somewhere.
>>
>> Best that I can tell, the pickup cartridge is a Sonotone 9T. Dunno
>> whether that was standard for the turntable or not.
>>
>>
>
> **WARNING WILL ROBINSON. WARNING!

ROTFL:)

Used to be one of my favourite sayings :)

> DO NOT play LPs with a 78 stylus. You WILL fuck the LP. Guaranteed.

Yeah, I'm aware of that. I've picked out a couple of really trashed lp's
for him to play just so he can with no care if they end up completely
destroyed.
>
> Yes, skating across the LP is a sign that the stylus has been removed.

It's there. I looked at it under a magnifying glass and you can see the
point, but it's small and looks considerably worn compared to the other
side. Not that I know what I'm looking at, but it won't do anything
other than slide across the record no matter where you have the arm
adjustments set.

> When you order a new stylus, get one with LP on both sides. Unless he
> plays 78s.

No 78's.

> You'll find what you need here:
>
> https://www.wagneronline.com.au/stanfield-stylus-listing-catalogue/turntable-parts/service-repair-parts/2558/fl/
>
>
> They post.

Thank you. I did find them on a google search, but they're out of stock.
I'll look around.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 18/04/2022 4:30 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 3:28 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 3:04 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> Been working fine until around an hour ago when the arm suddenly
>>> started darting across the record. I checked and there was some fluff
>>> attached to it, but cleaning it hasn't helped. I think the stylus is
>>> rooted on side 1 but it plays okay on side 2. It doesn't actually
>>> say, but it looks like the second side might be for 78's. Not sure
>>> and I'll have to order another one from somewhere.
>>>
>>> Best that I can tell, the pickup cartridge is a Sonotone 9T. Dunno
>>> whether that was standard for the turntable or not.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **WARNING WILL ROBINSON. WARNING!
>
> ROTFL:)
>
> Used to be one of my favourite sayings :)
>
>> DO NOT play LPs with a 78 stylus. You WILL fuck the LP. Guaranteed.
>
> Yeah, I'm aware of that. I've picked out a couple of really trashed lp's
> for him to play just so he can with no care if they end up completely
> destroyed.
>>
>> Yes, skating across the LP is a sign that the stylus has been removed.
>
> It's there. I looked at it under a magnifying glass and you can see the
> point, but it's small and looks considerably worn compared to the other
> side. Not that I know what I'm looking at, but it won't do anything
> other than slide across the record no matter where you have the arm
> adjustments set.
>
>> When you order a new stylus, get one with LP on both sides. Unless he
>> plays 78s.
>
> No 78's.
>
>> You'll find what you need here:
>>
>> https://www.wagneronline.com.au/stanfield-stylus-listing-catalogue/turntable-parts/service-repair-parts/2558/fl/
>>
>>
>> They post.
>
> Thank you. I did find them on a google search, but they're out of stock.
> I'll look around.
>
>
>
>

**See if you can take a couple of close-up photos of the cartridge and
it's mounting. It might be worth replacing the whole shebang. I
frequently do just that, if a particular stylus is not available, or
extremely difficult to obtain. Besides: Those old ceramic cartridges do
deteriorate over time.

On 18/04/2022 4:52 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 4:30 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> Thank you. I did find them on a google search, but they're out of
>> stock. I'll look around.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> **See if you can take a couple of close-up photos of the cartridge and
> it's mounting. It might be worth replacing the whole shebang. I
> frequently do just that, if a particular stylus is not available, or
> extremely difficult to obtain. Besides: Those old ceramic cartridges do
> deteriorate over time.

I've found a stylus and have one on the way. Should be here by the end
of the week, and in the mean time kid is enjoying it immensely.
Interestingly the bloke who restored the unit fitted it with a Bluetooth
receiver which is wired in to the "Mono" switch so you can pair your
phone or other bluetooth device and play digital tracks through the
unit's speakers. The speakers themselves have a pretty warm sound, and
it will be interesting to observe the differences in playback quality
between digital and analogue through the same speakers once the new
stylus arrives.

This particular stylus does seem hard to get and somewhat expensive
compared to others, so I'll check out replacing the cartridge for one
with a more commonly available stylus at some future point.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 19/04/2022 10:47 am, Noddy wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 4:52 pm, Trevor Wilson wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 4:30 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> Thank you. I did find them on a google search, but they're out of
>>> stock. I'll look around.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> **See if you can take a couple of close-up photos of the cartridge
>> and it's mounting. It might be worth replacing the whole shebang. I
>> frequently do just that, if a particular stylus is not available, or
>> extremely difficult to obtain. Besides: Those old ceramic cartridges
>> do deteriorate over time.
>
> I've found a stylus and have one on the way. Should be here by the end
> of the week, and in the mean time kid is enjoying it immensely.
> Interestingly the bloke who restored the unit fitted it with a
> Bluetooth receiver which is wired in to the "Mono" switch so you can
> pair your phone or other bluetooth device and play digital tracks
> through the unit's speakers. The speakers themselves have a pretty
> warm sound,

maybe Magnavox or Plessy Rola

> and it will be interesting to observe the differences in playback
> quality between digital and analogue through the same speakers once
> the new stylus arrives.
>
> This particular stylus does seem hard to get and somewhat expensive
> compared to others, so I'll check out replacing the cartridge for one
> with a more commonly available stylus at some future point.
>

--
https://tinyurl.com/Yosemite-Sam

FUCK PUTIN!!