|
Post by larryh on Mar 1, 2008 8:19:00 GMT -5
If I weren't hearing it for my self I would have never thought, until I did this, that a small thing like a type of glue could so completely throw off the sound. I removed the cork with the vinyl glue and returned to the rubber cement. The results were gladly as before. Not over driven, however surprisingly loud, a mute would come in handy. I keep wondering if I am getting this sound from a S-19 Sheraton what must it sound like on the Laboratory models? Would love to have a console again, but sadly in my small farm house the place it sounds best will only hold an upright.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 1, 2008 11:21:18 GMT -5
These come under the "who would have thought it" category. My new design I found a semi small screw eye kind of thing and decided to give it a try instead of the unruly wire I had been using. That worked out ok and it actually may create an adjustment for the length of the loop to the stylus where the phonographs are only off by a bit. Evidently at first I hadn't turned them as firmly as when I ended up glueing the cap pieces on to be sure they weren't causing trouble. But in trying to find the reason for the way increased sound, ( like it was out playing the Edisonic head with the mute open), which wasn't helping stop distortions. When I turned the screw out a full turn and tried it the sound level fell noticeably. Most likely the reason was the eye of the screw was pressing against the diaphragm and greatly increasing the vibration from the stylus bar to it. Then I discovered that what I had sort of taken as a suggestion to tie the loop at the eye hook with some thread to make a firmer contact was actually leading to distorted sound in some sensitive things like piano records. I found that out when I was checked to see if the sound level of the loud piano part was better with the screw turned out, it was but still a bit muddy sounding. Then I tried it with one I hadn't yet tied with thread and it played clearer. So I removed the thread from the first one and played it again, with much cleaner results. Hard to out guess all these things. You start to see why this is going on so long..
|
|
Schmaltz
New Member
"Shut your eyes and see" (James Joyce)
Posts: 14
|
Post by Schmaltz on Mar 1, 2008 21:08:41 GMT -5
Here are two spectrum analysis graphs showing the difference in frequency response of the two reproducers I used: the sound files analyzed were the two for #50815, the Imperial Marimba Band, which I posted earlier: The one above is a graph of the Factory diaphragm. Notice the dip the frequency curve takes around 4.5K, then it rises again around 7.5KHz because of the surface noise that this reproducer lets through. The second one, below, is of Larry's diaphragm: For this reproducer, we've got a smooth descent from the peaks to around 5K then no rise where the surface noise would be. It makes for a more pleasant listening experience all the way around, not just because the surface hiss is being clamped but because the midrange spectrum is being more faithfully reproduced. Cool, eh? Technical notes: the Audacity software package contains the ability to do sound spectrum analysis on about 25 seconds worth of any audio file, and also (in the same application) allows a screenshot of that graph as a "PNG." I changed each into a JPG with Photoshop. I'll post a couple more samples and accompanying graphs after I've received the new diaphragm.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 1, 2008 22:49:24 GMT -5
A very interesting feature unexpected here with this current diaphragm, but as I mentioned earlier the screw eye the linkage is connected to will screw in or out a number of turns. I found out the hard way today that too tight results in way to loud and over driven sound. Backing if off a couple turns produced better results. To night I had one I didn't turn in quite so far on purpose but the sound was noticeably weaker. So I tweaked the screw a turn or two in. Now the horns were too loud, took it apart and backed the screw one turn and it was considerably quieter. Sort of a volume regulator, who would have thought. Catch is it sounds best when it all balances and not too loud but not too weak either, so once it is set changing it in or out might not be the best of ideas. One thing or sure now is that the assembly is giving close results. This one is a tiny bit on the treble side, was noticeable on the loud high piano part, a bit too much reverb. Could be the cork, changing that screw helped a bit too, tightening the ring seemed to bring it down some also, but I would prefer it had a little more base. May have to change the cork on it or add a bit more too it?
|
|
|
Post by maroongem on Mar 1, 2008 23:05:01 GMT -5
Schmaltz, Are you using the same diamond stylus on both diaphragms? No, each reproducer is a complete unit and I'm not changing styluses over from one to the other. So how can you get an accurate reading using different styluses? Wouldn't the wear factor come into play (no pun intended) on the diamond used? Bill
|
|
Schmaltz
New Member
"Shut your eyes and see" (James Joyce)
Posts: 14
|
Post by Schmaltz on Mar 2, 2008 3:43:32 GMT -5
So how can you get an accurate reading using different styluses? Wouldn't the wear factor come into play (no pun intended) on the diamond used? Probably a factor; there's no two styli that are going to be worn the same. For now, these reproducers are staying the way they are. If someone else wants to make their own test, including changing out the stylus between two reproducers, they have my blessing.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 2, 2008 8:39:25 GMT -5
I am so impressed with this hook eyes ability to change the volume I had to write it again.. I got and tested one of the records with a diaphragm I had installed. While it played as clear as nearly possible, it was I dare say yet louder than an edisonic head. Well I felt it was too loud for most, except maybe a really large room. And then I recall reading where edison used an extra loud diaphragm for his tone test. I removed the weight and made one full turn of the hook eye unscrewing it. Returned it to the head and the volume is now near the normal edison range, although still louder than most. I am not sure still how much tinkering should be done with this at home, but it is rather an interesting development. Most likely it applies more to one diaphragm than another because some even though made the same seem louder almost right off the table.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 2, 2008 9:21:40 GMT -5
After this batch which are quite good go out I know what my next project will be.
I have been listening now nearly nonstop for over six weeks. I have heard a lot of things, some really good, but impossible to repeat, some hundreds by now in the trash. As I am waiting for some things to dry I had a diaphragm of the current design that had been to my ear a bit too treble compared to the others. In the past experiments I have added a second layer of cork with mixed results but it seemed to increase the base, perhaps mudding things even at times. On this one I added the extra layer and then to try it out I shaped the cork into more of a volcano sort of shape leaving the center noticeably higher than the rest and thinning a bit more than normal from the edges. I put on "In a persian market". I almost got Goose Bumps from the range of subtle changes in tones I was hearing. And I have heard a lot of late. I tired a piano record that I use as a tester, same effect, more depth and less sort of shallow sound high piano notes can have and a warmth of tone not usually heard. Definitely a keeper! I don't want to get into trying to redo and perfect it instantly but it sure gives me something to aim at for the next set of testing diaphragms.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 2, 2008 22:11:26 GMT -5
This is the first day I have ever been able to put together a number of diaphragms that all sounded about the same and exhibit no major and hardly any minor flaws. If anything were to be changed it would be the screw hook, I think somewhere there are tiny brass ones. It may be a good problem, but they tend to be overly loud in some cases although usually I can screw them back out a turn or two and get good results. The downside is that the eye head of the screw is rather large looking in comparison to what one would want if it were ideal. Of course a smaller one is going to transmit less sound so I won't know till I find a smaller and try what happens for sure. I don't see much problem with getting most everyone on the list one this week for sure, then I hope we can see some responses here as to what is being heard. I still will want to look around and see if I can find some other material that will respond in the same way without being prone to warping when assembled and accept the glues better. The most iffy thing about this design is the Rubber Cement. It seems to stay if you don't bother it, but I am not sure what a hot day, or extra cold room or just time might do. One thing about it, should it come loose another coat of rubber cement on both parts would probably put it back in business. I have switched several around while trying various things and the cement will peel quickly off the vinyl.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 3, 2008 21:19:58 GMT -5
Over the past two days I was able to construct at least 10 successful diaphragms, which I shipped most of out to testers.
I was anxious to get feed back on the sound, but I think I jumped the gun on the subject of the Rubber Cement I have had issues with. Tonight several I attempted to test just didn't sound right and I found that they were just barely hanging on to the cork piece. That has been my fear even though all those that went out preformed well. But shipping and weather and handling may cause problems with that piece. I am again testing the Vinyl cement I used previous and though it caused problems. But something has to change before I ship any others. Those already out as experimental versions can be repaired easily on site if necessary. The hard part is knowing if the piece is performing correctly. It isn't always easy to detect unless something is really loose. You end up with a vague sense that parts are a bit muffled sounding and its all the vibration of the unattached cork. Other than that, which of course is nearly everything, they are doing exceptionally well and I would probably be pleased to call it a good job. No more will leave till I permanently solve this problem. I have one glued lightly with the vinyl glue, but if past results are any indication it takes about 24 hours before the glue can stiffen sufficiently to become a problem. I only coated the cork side even though it says to do both surfaces. Trying to limit the amount of material between them and keep the flexibility to a maximum.
It will be fun after all this work to finally have some hearing in person what all this has been about. I hope its been worth while.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 3, 2008 22:32:41 GMT -5
I got the one in with the vinyl glue lightly applied and so far its very clear and not causing issues, but the glue is new yet.
On the still amazes me side, the sound was a bit weaker than some, I removed the weight and gave the eye screw a turn and a half, and its playing noticeably stronger. Sort of a cool unintended outcome. The link was a bit long too, which that also fixed.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 4, 2008 7:25:59 GMT -5
The results are still up in the air on that new glue. As seems to happen it played nicely last night, but the same pieces are louder this morning, and I think I hear it over driving the sound in places it didn't before. Its a bit hard to judge as the sound when correct is extremely clear. Thats the up side. It could be that the diaphragm is now more sensitive to the issues a record may have bringing them out. That is probably wishful thinking. I have only tired a few pieces as its really early in the morning, I will know more later. I hate when you come to this place. Something that sounds great and then a change detracts. Not sure what to tell those that are getting theirs in a few days. I had suggested removing the cork and glueing with the new glue but not sure now.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 4, 2008 10:58:47 GMT -5
Listening to a number more I have mixed feelings about the success of the glue.. I still think the glue in some way effects the overall response of the diaphragm. Several records exhibited top end vibrations that did not show up with the previous but poor glue choice. I always seem to end up in a place where everything falls into place except one thing. I was able to calm it down a lot by yet farther screwing the hook eye out, so that is a benefit I wouldn't have considered before this set. Makes the little loop even shorter, but hey it works so far. I need to locate a smaller eye hook. I looked yesterday but the number I have is the smallest standard one available locally. Some where I have a can of spray glue I purchased for this project but couldn't figure out where the heck I put it. Going to look some more to try it on at least one and see if it acts different than the vinyl glue.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 5, 2008 9:16:08 GMT -5
Yesterdays messages and work got side tracked when the power went out for over 14 hours. Having a bad ice storm here. Have been checking new sources of glue, and advising those who are getting the first shipment to see if they are performing well as they are, if so leave them alone for the time being. I don't think the vinyl glue is the answer, but only checked a couple with it so far.. I tried one with a light coat of spray glue which may be more like the rubber cement without turning loose. Testing records is a bit difficult as I have some that sound sparklingly clear on the diaphragm, then I get to others that it seems to have difficulty with. I just don't know for sure which is which. I got some records yesterday and every one of them sounded awful to say the least. I can't help but think they are poor quality or production. Each had flaws even though the seller rated them as E- that made them un listenable to me. Maybe I expect too much. But when a record is way off center on the pressing and you get three like that and the others have awful surface noise and several with almost overdriven sounding shrill content, I can't help but think it is the records? In checking some of them against the original diaphragm some were a tiny bit less offensive with it, but I question if maybe mine is just bringing it out a bit more, or mine is just failing to play them well enough. I know I only started out here to beat the sound quality around new, but I would like to think that it will play nearly everything with reasonable freedom from distortion. Time will tell. And this is only the first chapter in the search anyway. I knew that.
|
|
|
Post by larryh on Mar 5, 2008 20:02:53 GMT -5
Nearly all the names on my list now have a copy of sorts of the current diaphragm coming, but not quite all as I try and decide what to do about the glues. We have had several days of power failures including most of today.. But I did get a chance to revisit the idea I had mentioned once about a yet improved tone version. I made up another and do feel it is superior even to the ones I am working on sending but some things about it need perfecting before I try to mass produce it. It is possible that should those that have the one coming, after giving it good testing, might return it because I think I could update it. One thing which has a small effect on tone but looks better is that I got tired of the size of the eye hook and took a snips to it and bent it into a smaller size, which no only looks better but allows for a bit longer linkage piece. It is really the second addition of a shaped cork section that adds a broader width to the sound and seems to aid in some of the difficult to play though quickly changing dance selections. On the other side is both times it sort of added a bit of vibration in its self, but I think I may be getting that down to little or nothing. Be glad when the last few more are out. Usually of late these have gone together and with some testing most proved satisfactory to pass on, but these last few with a different glue have been more challenging.
|
|