Cool! What do I win? Tony's resistors? I will install them - I swear!
[/quote]
Stell
Yes you are the WINNER!!. You can PM Martin if he wants to send them to you they are yours. All I ever wanted was for someone to put them in their amp and enjoy them. Let me know how they work out. PM me if you have any questions.
@Erwin.Im done carry on
Tony
[/quote]
I thought this was an exhibition - not a competition. But I will gladly accept and install them.
And the kicker? Today is actually my birthday!! 61 today - just a little closer to retirement.......
Checking the original audio clips in ProTools show some interesting stuff:
Both resistors have the same transient at a strong pick attack but right after that transient the output is compressed on the old ones.
The new ones don't have that compression after the transient.
What is it? Hopefully food for thought!
So if Erwins statement above is true and we can see it on the screenshots then this would validate what it is I am hearing
As far as the feel thing goes what I get is a little more compression on the top end on the old Dales when you really dig in vs the new ones which don't compress as easily and the spike in the top end happens.Again with all the compression going on in the recording process, it's hard to pick it out
So this would help solve the "is there a difference" question and why some people can hear it and some not could be a different set of questions.
What we need to do now is figure out what is it that could be causing this compression effect.
I have a few theory's on this?
Anyone got any ideas?
BTW.This effect Erwin sees would be fairly difficult to hear on a recording IMO.
Tony
" The psychics on my bench is the same as Dumble'"
10thTx wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:26 pm
At the time that I made the statement of 28% of the responses indicated that was what was showing.
The following three categories of responses all indicate hearing a difference or preferring a difference. That was 72%
With respect, 10thtx
Oh I see what you mean. You're adding up the sum of the three last options, but, that means that you think people only chose 2, 3 or 4, not 2 and 3 or 2 and 4? That was my point, i don't think it's clear if the poll was set to block only one answer, so someone could have just voted for "I heard a difference" AND voted for "I preferred sample 1" 1 person, 2 votes but only 1 total stat...
That's my point. IF it was purely 'choose one' then you're right. I only chose one because I could hear a difference but had no preference. If you could only choose one, then you're correct for sure.
So that means somoene can vote both for "I heard a difference" and "I preferred sample X" Meaning it's tricky to pull data from it, since we don't know how many may have done so. Some may have only voted for "I preferred sample X" some may have also said oddly "I can't hear a difference" and "I preferred sample x"
pompeiisneaks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:35 am
So that means somoene can vote both for "I heard a difference" and "I preferred sample X" Meaning it's tricky to pull data from it, since we don't know how many may have done so. Some may have only voted for "I preferred sample X" some may have also said oddly "I can't hear a difference" and "I preferred sample x"
~Phil
Yes that's the case
I'm working on screenshots from Pro Tools and layered them on top of each other in Inkscape, one with initial attack super zoomed in so you can see the waveform in detail, one with half a second view and one with a 2 second view. Pics coming soon!
pompeiisneaks wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:35 am
So that means somoene can vote both for "I heard a difference" and "I preferred sample X" Meaning it's tricky to pull data from it, since we don't know how many may have done so. Some may have only voted for "I preferred sample X" some may have also said oddly "I can't hear a difference" and "I preferred sample x"
~Phil
Yes that's the case
I'm working on screenshots from Pro Tools and layered them on top of each other in Inkscape, one with initial attack super zoomed in so you can see the waveform in detail, one with half a second view and one with a 2 second view. Pics coming soon!
Erwin
Erwin,
I had another thought too. I'm still on the road so can't do it for a while but have you got any spectral editing tools? I've just bought Spectral layers
which is fantastic and if you giver me a time section where you think there's the most obvious 'difference' say a 3 second clip then I can put that into the spectral editing and hopefully we can 'see' the difference. I have the files here but can't listen critically/properly. can you tell me where you're seeing the transient/compression so I can take a look too as that requites no critical listening.
Marcus,
As markers you can use the time codes I posted from the flipping file earlier in this thread. Around 1.58 is ok.
I don' t think I have a spectral plug in, in pro tools.
erwin_ve wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:50 am
Marcus,
As markers you can use the time codes I posted from the flipping file earlier in this thread. Around 1.58 is ok.
I don' t think I have a spectral plug in, in pro tools.
Erwin
Ok, I'm hoping this will reveal something tangible we call all see can you give me a spot I can look at the waveform compression you're seeing?
erwin_ve wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:50 am
Marcus,
As markers you can use the time codes I posted from the flipping file earlier in this thread. Around 1.58 is ok.
I don' t think I have a spectral plug in, in pro tools.
Erwin
Ok, I'm hoping this will reveal something tangible we call all see can you give me a spot I can look at the waveform compression you're seeing?
erwin_ve wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:50 am
Marcus,
As markers you can use the time codes I posted from the flipping file earlier in this thread. Around 1.58 is ok.
I don' t think I have a spectral plug in, in pro tools.
Erwin
Ok, I'm hoping this will reveal something tangible we call all see can you give me a spot I can look at the waveform compression you're seeing?
M
I just did?
LOL
Ok I'll take a look. I'm quite excited to get the spectral tools on this as I really think this might give us a breakthrough on the 'frequency' aspects of the sounds.
I'm not seeing any envelope differences at this zoom level.
1;58 dale test.png
looking at a spot slightly on the right ans zooming if you look ahead of the cursor slightly you'll see the top 'left' blue waveform is slightly higher than the bottom 'left green waveform.
dale 2.png
Is that the spot?
M
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Marcus it is at 1.58 where you hear the high note.(Stronger pick attack create the audible effect for me, just listen for the right point)
I remembered Audacity has a Spectral tool; I loaded ( sample accurate) the old and new files at 1.58 for almost a second. Spectral showing differences, the one that jumps out is around 1000Hz. Ear sensitive area! Upper pic is old Dales, Lower pic is new Dales.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
erwin_ve wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:54 am
Marcus it is at 1.58 where you hear the high note.
I remembered Audacity has a Spectral tool; I loaded ( sample accurate) the old and new files at 1.58 for almost a second. Spectral showing differences, the one that jumps out is around 1000Hz. Ear sensitive area! Upper pic is old Dales, Lower pic is new Dales.
yes, I can see that, I wonder if that's the same spot on my second pic? I agree 1K is a good speech frequency area. It's up or down by ~3db which is significant I'd say.
Also 11k there is a similar difference. I'd say the new dales will have more 'air' that the old ones with a 3db difference at 11k if it is indeed across the board.
I'll load it into spectral layers pro when I get back as that will give a spectrogram picture with all frequencies in real time which may show other frequencies too.
it will look something like this for each audio clip.
spectra layers.png
Erwin, can you do the same again in another random place as it would be interesting to see if that 1k thing is across the board and if not why not so the 'scientists' among us can explain why?
M
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Tomorrow or somewhere this weekend more. I have a busy schedule the coming 2 days.
1000Hz is almost the octave of the played b note in that spot. 493Hz is the B(7th position E string). Lets see if it's frequency depedent or played note dependent.
