Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: "David Satz" <DSatz@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 18 Jun 2006 09:39:49 -0700
Whoa--folks, please slow down. Many of Jim's beliefs are the opposite
of mine, and I'd agree that his postings here don't constitute proof of
any claims. But the mockery and condescension toward him in some
people's postings here strike me as misguided.
A few years ago I became intrigued by some of the people who "upgrade"
(custom modify) professional audio gear--particularly Jim Williams, the
late Stephen Paul, and Klaus Heyne. So I sent some microphones to each
of them for "upgrading," and also sent Jim a dbx 760X preamp which he
thoroughly reworked.
I found that Jim is straightforward, doesn't overcharge, doesn't try to
mystify the customer or stir up a "cult" following, and is a genuine
pleasure to deal with. In particular he is open about his methods, and
welcomes both subjective and objective testing of the results.
Since my translation and editing work put me in an unusually fortunate
position to take him up on that proposition, I did so: After he
modified a pair of my AKG C 414-B ULS microphones, I sent one of them
to Schoeps in Germany for testing. (That was all arranged in advance as
part of my little scheme.)
Now I have to be careful how I describe the outcome, since _in no way_
does Schoeps endorse such third-party modifications. In fact that
disclaimer is putting it mildly; they had been through some ugly
experiences with other "modifiers" in the past. The customer is always
the most vulnerable party in any such exchange, while the company is in
a bad position no matter what they do.
In this case, however, the modified AKG microphone was found to be ca.
4 dB quieter than its stock counterpart, and its high frequency
response was elevated slightly, in a way which was subjectively
evaluated as sounding "better" by a highly-placed person in the
company--someone who thinks highly of the 414-B ULS in general. In
fairness I must say that the news was not all to the good, since the
modified microphone was also found to have rather poor immunity to RFI.
Part of Jim's modifications is to remove one layer of screening from
the capsule head; that may not be so advisable.
Similarly, my own testing of the modified mike preamp confirmed that
its input headroom had been improved several dB, which was my main
concern--I can't make extravagant claims about improved "sonics," but
simply from a down-to-earth technical standpoint the preamp was
certainly better for my purposes than it had been before.
Again, say what you like about resistors, capacitors or criteria of
evidence--I'm right there with you. But I would like to ask that we
please avoid mob action here, which is not very scientific either.
--best regards
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Scott Dorsey
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Bob Cain
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: audioaesthetic
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- References:
- Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: seanbroderick20003
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Ethan Winer
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: jwilliams3
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Randy Yates
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- From: Randy Yates
- Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- Prev by Date: Re: Voicework
- Next by Date: Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- Previous by thread: Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- Next by thread: Re: Audible Differences Between Metal Film Resistors?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|