Talk but not walk?

"So with different structures which vary in content by the hour and the day you will go mad wishing for what you had previous. When was that wonderful adjustment made to each block..you forgot didn’t you."

Tom, again like with Robert, it’s unfortunate you have had problems tuning. On TuneLand we read about the different listeners’ learning curves and how they end up with their choices of tuning tools from very simple to tune all the way to extremely advanced tuning.

Also if I may many who have read this thread have been visiting TuneLand looking at the pictures asked for here, they’re not hard to find. MG respects that the line between information and promotion is a fine one but MG also realizes how the trolling has worked on this and other threads and is not about crossing that line. On this thread you see one side asking for pictures or information and shortly after you see the trolling trap set that MG is using this thread to promote. It’s a common internet trolling tactic being used by some of the posters here. TuneLand the forum supplies the answers to any of these questions and has since 2004. You can look on the archives for some of the show & tell or visit the newer forum that goes back to 2008 but still has archived pictures on it.

jf47t,

If the pictures become available, could you post a link?

Hello Gentlemen hope everyone had a good weekend!

I believe Michael is writing on his TuneLand thread tonight "absolutely certainly I'll snap some pictures" he said. I don't know if he's been up on this thread today we were pretty busy running around.

@geofkait,

Thanks for pointing out my mistake as I generally make a few more with age setting in.

You of all people questioning engineering? Beep Beep - is that the sound of too much amg56 “traffic” in your head or has MG finally won you over with his compliments and praise?

I (we) are not desperate whatsoever. The On Stage Studio™ product is about to come online and will be open for auditions but it never hurts to learn why others apply different techniques that are totally uncommon.

We want to know why chassis lids, and cable connectors and barrels come off and what effect this has over the norm other than safety issues. We have our opinions of course but would like to hear the technical side from the OP walker or his assistant, the talker.

Heck, I’m trying to figure out how to keep a post alive on this thread. It’s obvious that you and me have thicker skin and do not complain to the moderators or have posts silenced, so I'm thinking you too should cut me some slack GacK.

audiopoint,

I think that geoffkait may be right about his view of your most recent post, but it would also be interesting to see that studio that jf47t described. If for nothing else, then for the novelty of it. I am trying to imagine ("picture" in my head) it and cannot come up with anything but a place you need to walk around very carefully in order not to trip or damage something. I am probably wrong about that. Ok, I am surely wrong, but that is what I imagine/picture.

Jf47t,

You posted:

“Picture having a system from start to finish without any enclosed chassis? I'm not just talking about the playback part but all the way from the microphone forward. He started with the tunable studio (live room), control room, mastering room, in studio playback room all tunable. All the equipment was without their chassis, or custom built without chassis from the microphones on. No cable barrels no plugs every stage was either hardwired or clipped. No cover even on the mixers.”

First you say “imagine” then state “he started with” so which is it?

Does this recording studio exist? Does it have a physical address?

Can we book studio time in order to see and hear what it is you are attempting to tell us?

You posted:

“No cable barrels, no plugs”

I am assuming you are talking about the XLR, TRS and RCA mic and signal cables but are we also talking Alternating Current power cable plugs as in hardwired to the wall feeds? Are the steel covers then removed from the primary AC panels too?

Are you stating all the equipment covers have been removed from the total electronics package consisting of amps, compressors, all outboard digital effects, power supplies, microphones and the mixers too?

We would really enjoy seeing pictures of this studio to determine if in fact it does exist and is not imaginary or imaginarily engineered so do you have any?

Robert

These are all questions about audio and application so I am hoping this post remains void of a couple people filing complaint reports hence leading to the removal of this post. People want to know more...

grannyring,

I would second your question about modifications of the Pioneer receiver. In fact, I already got curious about it in my earlier post. I do not doubt it can be done, but it would be great to know what made the difference.

Addendum: I would also think that knowing the exact model of Pioneer receiver would be interesting to those who are more adept with technical aspect of its build.

jf47t,

It would not mean that all the others are misrepresenting, at all. In fact, changing anything in the system (from CD to composition of the air in the listening environment) could potentially have some effect on the perception of sound for the listener. After all, that is the purpose of tweaking/tuning. Altering what was initially heard. It still stands that the drummer would be the only one to know if he really hit something in a certain way that we imagine, after a heavily-modified process, as him changing angles of sticks to the drum or whatever else. There is nothing wrong with listeners adjusting sound to their liking, why wouldn't they enjoy even more. The simplest, for the end-user, way of adjusting is probably tone controls on an amplifier but there are many many more ways, including whatever kind of wood is used somewhere in the system.

Maybe one could say that virtually every system is misrepresenting (ears do not represent, though, they are a receptive link in the chain).

Remember how the room got bigger when you did something? It sounded more interesting/pleasing to you, at least that is how it read. Well, room was only one size originally. It has not changed since 1990 when the CD was recorded. Being able to manipulate the perception of the size of the room is misrepresenting the real room. Nothing wrong with that, but it is not a true representation of how big the room was during the recording, or what was adjusted during the mixing/mastering/some other process shortly afterwards. Many pieces of electronic equipment have modes "jazz club", "church", "stadium" which are aiming exactly for the same effect of changing listener's perception of the original room size. Of course, they may change other things in the process and not be acceptable to "audiophile" crowd, but they are aiming to be a simple and convenient solution for those listeners who would like the effect, but have no knowledge or time to do what you did by placing different things in different positions of your listening room. Both achieve similar result by different means. I would speculate that one does it conveniently while the other one does it less conveniently but without affecting other parameters. At the same time, both may misrepresent the size of the real room which is the only correct size.

What sound level (dB) do you listen to Hindu Love Gods at? I feel it needs a little bit louder setting, but am curious at what level do you feel you gain the best results.

"It would be interesting to talk to the drummer, if he still remembers it, and hear if all of that actually took place. Can it be that, by changing whatever is being tuned/tweaked the nature of what happened during the recording gets misrepresented?"

That's a frightening thought. That would mean that only one system and one set of ears is correct and all the others are misrepresenting.

"I can see exactly where the drumstick is hitting the drum and how the drummer uses the striking differently for tone changing."

"...and converted this amp into a variable music machine that now can easily rival the very best of the best."

Variable Tuning!

I’ve spent 3 days listening to Hindu Love Gods with MG himself as my personal DJ I could easily go another week. Learning how much is on a recording is an event you must experience to believe. I didn’t know when we started that this would end up being such a profound trip. The difference between having a listen with Michael and tuning with Michael is a hobby changer. He has shown me why and how all systems play the same recording differently. To be absolutely fair when MG started this thread he didn’t used one of his tricked out components. He ordered a used vintage Pioneer receiver unpacked it in front of me and plugged it in. It’s that same Pioneer that has gone from rags to riches right before my eyes. MG took his time and converted this amp into a variable music machine that now can easily rival the very best of the best.

This latest setup MG created one of his favorite soundstages and had me listen to Hindu Love Gods. It was quite different from his other sounds. This recording now sounds like it was done inside of a recording studio and mixer with the engineer wearing headphones to do the mixing. That is the headphone type of stage only bigger and being able to have that whole body vibrating feeling. The stage is now doubled in size over what it was and I can see all the specifics of the instruments and players. On track two I can see exactly where the drumstick is hitting the drum and how the drummer uses the striking differently for tone changing. You can hear and see when he is hitting the drum dead center and see and hear the position of the stick change as he goes slightly off center. In other words I’m able to see the drum stay still with me seeing the drum shell stationary and the stick move and tone change amazing. Watching the snare drum action alone is worth the price of admission.

@jf47t

"I understand that Michael Green is a "walker".

Now I get it;

"I understand that Michael Green is a "walker". I take it that you are the same for same reason. I accept that I am a "talker". That is clear"

Glupson as Geoff would say "it is not rocket science"