Hi Dave... no I gave up I must admit !!. More important things to do .. you know how it is !!. I expect you'll notice that theres very little information or comment on this device, and most comments are negative !!. Under the bonnet, all looks quite feasible, but I think, for some reason, they just don't fundamentally work. Initially when I quizzed my Ebay supplier he said he had installed several with no issues. When sent the video evidence, and although not directly said, I think we can be assured that he'd never actually investigated what the thing was really doing & my bet is that all his "several install" customers (can't say I believe that either !) are merrily exporting !!. I've since got my hands on a Solic 200, which worked perfectly. However, it did demonstrate that with just 1 immersion (and possibly even 2) I still run the risk of export in summer. If you could switch inverters in and out of "non export mode" that would be fine, but that facility is always buried deep the settings and thus can't be "automated" in any way. In the end, I decided to operate the inverter in "non export" mode & use a tiny 4volt solar panel angled and tilted the same as the main array, to produce a voltage calibrated to the main array. That drives a single transistor relay driver, and relay, that switches on the immersion when there is sufficient solar output. So, no where near as much "lost" energy recovered into "hot water" as with a true "proportional" controller, but absolutely no risk of export and at least some "lost" energy recovered. Also no sillyness of having 200ltr of stored hot water in summer that you have no use for, but still need somewhere to dump even more excess engery !. Running this way, I've done the last summer on, typically, 2.8kW per day, with a single room air conditioner running, (whenever my little 4 volt panel sensed enough solar to power it). It's all a bit clunky, but does recover/usefully use otherwise lost excess power with no chance of export. You could be forgiven for thinking I'm no longer a fan of "immersion diverters" !!!!!. I think I've still got some odd/shaky contacts for the "manufacturer" if you want to give that line of attack a shot .... Cheers, Karl.

I did read on another forum that the unit can develop a fault with the Triac (the main component inside the unit responsible for controlling the power to your immersion)

No ... you've got that absolutely right. I The surface noise is constant, so when you play back with a minus 20dB filter, that noise reduces by 20 dB. At the same time, if you put 20dB more "music on plastic" when you record, then take it away again when you play back, the level (volume) of music is "the same" / "as intended" / "what you first thought of" !!!!!. Just one of many clever tricks that makes vinyl viable !!

It's the artists idea of music, not mine, but repetitive beats are hardly new anyway !

have you been asleep for like 40 years mate?

The "digital" / "analogue" divide is alive and well !. Personally I love vinyl for it's "warmth", but, with experience of cutting I am also well aware of it's limitations also. Officially, vinyl has a higher noise floor, a very limited frequency response in the 4kHz to 8kHz region and bass is always mono, BUT, the system is extremely "electronically ", "magnetically" and "mechanically" dynamic which create frequency dependent limiting, resonances and harmonics. These are really flaws but are exactly what gives it it's unique character. My personal music listening system is digital from source to speaker. It's lighting fast, extremely detailed, very involving and very musical - so it can be done !. The monitoring system in the cutting room is traditional passive speakers with valve amplification. Playing the same track (vinyl or digital) on the two systems does of course give two completely different performances. The biggest difference I notice, is a more "open" and expansive image with the analogue/valve system, while the digital system reveals more structure to every sound. I have a track (digital) with a low volume sound, way back in the mix that I have been aware of for years. When I first set up my digital listening system the sound was resolved fully for the first time in my life !. I now know it is a vibraslap !!. I think the main problem with digital re-masters of vinyl recordings is that the studio's "do too much". The result is a kind of "over cooked" version of what was fine before they touched it !. I've never heard any re-master from Abbey Road studios that sounds any good at all. If they simply "cleaned it up a little" it would probably be fine, but I think they simply go too far. It's encouraging though, that artists like Kate Bush insist on a percentage of recordings being available on vinyl, and, still record on 24 track magnetic tape. Interestingly, CD was never meant to be a "high end" system, (particularly with it's 21kHz cut off) but "accidentally" got accepted as "the standard". Also interestingly, given CD's error correction systems, officially, you'll never hear the same performance twice ... a similarity with vinyl !. Personally I think that both "analogue" and "digital" have things to learn from each other. There are things that you can achieve in the digital domain that are very difficult to achieve in the analogue domain (without causing undesirable side effects) so I think there is room in our musical world for tactful use of both. Beyond that, I am quietly amused that vinyl sales are bigger than CD sales !!!!!

It's Faithless " A kind of peace". There are loads of re mixes available, almost every dj on the planet seems to have "had a go" with it !!. I "discovered it years ago when Annie Nightingale played it on Radio 1 !!!!!

Sorry Al Ex - we forgot to update this ... it is over 9 years old and due for update !!. We have also moved server and simplified the web site ... new address ; www.blacksea.tundzha.co

@@absolutekarl Thank you very much for the working link. I no longer hoped to find a working version with information. Thank you for such a pleasant surprise!

My pleasure ... Enjoy your music

@@absolutekarl Thanks. On the previous site there was a table with the filling of pipes according to the frequency, now it cannot be found unfortunately. It would be great to see her.

@@alx621 It's here !! blacksea.tundzha.co/en/rats-downloads/#page-content

[email protected] & [email protected]

Exactly. I plan on doing the same using a pvc pipe tube but my pump burnt itself out as I mostly engrave and the pumps do not like to be restricted (engraving is a mere whisper of air so to create negative pressure so smoke, and debris, does not get on the lens).

Ah, Scott, I know ... Trouble is no one seems to understand anything much about bass. Certainly not how & just how much it affects musical involvement "emotionally". And, the number of home cinema's, ("proper" home cinemas too with multi thousand pound speaker/amp systems) I've heard where a helicopter fly past scene results in a big boomy undefined lump of bass, is (or should be) embarrassing to the supply and install trade. When, with just a sensible measure of standing wave control our helicopter fly past would deliver a far more involving and believable experience where we could hear & feel every individual rotor blade pass overhead. "Room correction", as built in to several manufacturers systems/amplifiers these days can and does help, but isn't perfect. Going back "a million years" to Tag Mclaren's TMREC ... a system every owner I came across left switched off as they felt it sounded better without it, to, the current day, where, we've hard proof that Linn's approach built into Exakt systems stops a whole octave too soon ! Harping back some years again, I even had an enquiry from a movie soundtrack company - one of those who's logo is on the back of every DVD, who, as I understood it, had a room used to develop encoding/decoding hardware with no acoustic treatment at all. So they were making technical and artistic decisions based on "what" !!! The bottom line is that, from manufacturers right through dealers and installers, to the end user, only a tiny handful have ever experienced a room with good bass end acoustic control/treatment.

Or perhaps, to be frank, Frank, maybe the listener's system (which includes acoustics) isn't good enough to get across the fact that it is unashamedly recorded in a room full of lovely whirring kit. The "bucket" is a deliberate low mid / hi bass hump in response to people listening on "seriously challenged systems" saying it was too bass light for them. Clearly, can't win em all ! Also, it's great that you both heard and picked up on this, so we look forward to your order for some RaTs (www.blacksea.coolroche.com/index.php/rats/) to tame similar issues (but born of acoustic anomalies, rather than recording response tweaks: standing waves at those lower frequencies) in your own listening room ...

Do a google search for RIAA equalisation. You'll find graphs !!. It's a specific industry standard, so must be followed exactly to sound right on playback.

I would refrain from recording frequencies above 16 kHz.

@@robfriedrich2822 "Recording"? Do you mean in mixing to cut frequencies above 16kHz out? Thanks for the reply it's hard to get solid info sometimes.

Ha, yes I know what you mean about hoovers ... put them in another house half a mile down the street and still hear the b****y things !!. We just used "cheap" Chinese made "pond pumps" : commonly used to supply air to Koi ponds and alike. They are diaphragm / piston affairs, so the air "pulses" but that doesn't mater so much as it gets smoothed in the swarf collector. We used 2 together to get enough suck - that's the thing ... getting enough suck to overcome the dreaded static, and, stop the stylus heating coil from frying (assuming you run it as hot as Souri suggests). Just had a quick scan on e-Bay & something like this is the kind of kiddie: Item number 232085656272 Good luck - Swarf collection is definitely one of the real issues with that vinyl - like material !!!!!!!! Cheers Karl.

Hi Thanks Karl ..i have tried persevering with the medical vacuum but to no joy the thing just wasn't pulling enough probably due to the static too.. the pipe going toward the bucket with the filter was getting clogged (so I've had to go back to the dreaded hoover for now thats in its own house outside the studio) ..but i will look into those diaphragm pond pumps .theres so many pond pumps out there and some really are bad or over priced.. but i probably tried the wrong type in the past it certainly looks like it from your set up thanks a lot for the tip

Hi ... A German guy (Souri) makes the cutterhead and overhead mechanism to be used with a SL1200 or similar hi torque deck. His site is: www.vinylrecorder.com/ We've used the Vinylrecorder mechanism & head on several decks, ending up with our own 3 motor affair !!. What ever deck you use it really does need to be strong !. We also use digital signal processing to significantly increase the frequency response and maintain a flatter response. Cutting on "vinyl - like" blanks as opposed to "lacquer" masters takes some doing, it's not a good sounding material, top end is difficult, and de-essing (of some sort) an absolute must for loud cuts !!. Souri's kit is pretty amazing for the price, and the head, while it doesn't have a flat response is absolutely fine, if not, really rather good !. Others will tell you different, but it's because they haven't eq'd properly, or quite understand whats going on and being asked of the system as a whole. Let me know if you take the plunge ... there's a serious learning curve, but great fun !. Oh, and you'll have to visit Germany for a training day with Souri !!. Fun though ... he's a brilliant engineer.

thank you for detailed response!

Your welcome - if you do anything with Souri, just be aware he can be a touch difficult !!. Shame as he's a nice guy really doing vinyl stuff "for the right reasons" ....

I listened on my cheap Skull Candy plugs. To me it didn't sound harsh at all. But it sounded more fluid and alive. the Bass had more punch. I could feel the sound more. Of course it depends how good it's mastered no matter if it's digital or vinyl.

+cannis solis Actually we're not confusing anything, with anything else. In Vinyl record circles, particularly when dealing with DJ's, the term "club level" is well accepted to mean, "a recorded level, on vinyl, louder than usual, standard pressed records". Since DJ's mainly operate with "VU" meters, this "club level" recording level, is seen to be anything greater +6dB, compared to a typical "normally" recorded (cut) record, referencing at 0dB. It's a kind of "artistic" statement rather than any attempt at a "real standard", simply describing that the vinyl itself has elevated recorded levels. More correctly, the level on vinyl should be stated in terms of velocity, since it's a highly mechanical medium ... with one (of many) adopted "standards" being 5cm/Sec equaling 0dB. For obvious reasons the Xcm/Sec. form of measuring/describing recorded level is dropped in favor of XdB, which means more to more people. As you say, not only if engineers would behave themselves with recording levels in the digital domain (different issues applying to analog) but if the broadcast and music distribution industries would also opt out of the "loudness war" and leave it up to the listeners to chose the "volume" - life would be a whole lot less distorted !!!. What worries me more however, is that with the continual "dumbing down" of delivered music quality, no one seems to aspire to "hi-end / full bandwidth / high dynamic range" any more. Still, at least, we that do aspire, listen to the whole song !!.......

"particularly when dealing with DJ's" oh well we're screwed then, most dj's think those little red flashing lights should be permanently on rather than rarely glimpsed!

+cannis solis We're screwed anyway, most other music related industries do pretty well the same too. If your looking for a sensible view on the matter, the paper "distortion to the people" from TC Electronics makes truly brilliant bedtime reading - form, people that "aspire to quality" as we do ....

thanks for the link. if you are in the industry it's up to you to help it change, if enough people rebel it will change, after all, squeaky wheels get oiled.

@@cannissolis it's not that any engineer doesn't understand it, it's that so many people who don't know what they're doing can call themselves "engineer" and get away with it. The biggest scam in the record industry today is the self-proclaimed "mastering engineer" that is usually neither.

+Reg Thomas Hi Reg, I just decided to cut the bit showing the label application, as it's not exactly interesting content !!. But, of course, playback checked, labeled, numbered and "signed in the scroll-out" is an "end product" as a customer would receive.

Unfortunately not !!. I've just been playing with various shapes and sizes of suction tube right next to the stylus, in an effort to get the best swarf removal, particularly when cutting "vinyl-like" plastic at warm temperature, and lots of static !!. So far I wouldn't say any particular combination of "flat" or circular tube, to the side or behind the stylus is better or worse, at "letting go" under conditions of high static charge and / or extreme lateral modulation. More than anything the issue seems to be static, so that's probably the thing to fix, rather than small details around the vacuum system. Without static, vacuum level and suction tube detail are not that crucial, but with static you need mountains of vacuum. Best I think, to sort the static issue !!. It's all to do with cutting on virtually un-cutable plastic !!. Cutting on lacquer would be better, then produce a hard wearing plastic disc from that ...... hang on .... I think that's been done before !!!. What we really need is a "one off" capable, desk top pressing "plant". One day ... 3D printers will probably be able to do just that !!!!!!!!!

absolutekarl thanks ! F*** thos 3d printers....

Dr. Dub Vinyl Schallplatten Herstellung Ha ... I think the printers are basically ok, after all the Chinese printed a block of flats in under a week ... it's the CAD software that's a nightmare ... it's like being in a Quantum world, where, everything is everywhere, but no where at the same time, until the point when you actually measure it, when, it magically becomes real ... Ugh

Hi Maxwell, yep, they are gorgeous !. Some 9 years ago I and 3 colleagues did a whole week-end of subjective listening to about 15 different amps, from classic British designs, like the Quad, through the "cheap" Chinese offerings, and up to multi thousand pound affairs. This (aptly named I would say) "Music angel" beat the lot by, in most cases a huge margin !. The one featured in the video is that same amp - wouldn't let it go after hearing it !!. It's had a couple of "semi" mod's since then: both the volume control and input select have been hard bypassed, in favor of a good passive pre-amp, which made a huge improvement, and, it's had it's input and output valves replaced with cryogenic (freeze treated) valves. You could have accused the valves of making it sound a bit sterile at first, but after a while you realize just how much more detail it's recovering. Overall a seriously musical sounding amp for rather silly money !!

Absolutely !

Right, MP3s were a compromise when portable storage was expensive. These days, we have 2TB sd cards, and 8 TB hard Drives. So yes, MP3s sound like shit, they are a Lossy compression format. You cut the size by a factor of 10, yet lose about 70% quality. I don't know if anyone here has been inside a cave, but there are Lossless formats, like FLAC and AAC. I prefer FLAC but AAC will do as well, the quality is stunning, far superior to that of a superior. I have a FLAC from a CD and a FLAC from a Vinyl, the Vinyl FLAC has slightly more distortion and is extremely large in file size even after compression. I don't know where the extra information is going but it's definitely not going to the quality. In short, CD Lossless > Vinyl Lossless

Eminem's Vinyl releases especially Infinite, sound amazing! but his European consumer release CD's sound like shit.

the problem isn't cd mp3 or vinyl, the problem is you posting eminem as an example, lamer!

Ha ha .... yes a tad severe !!.

Sure, the "warts" (or character as I would call it) of vinyl is definitely appealing, but I'd question whether digital should be better ... given a constrained frequency response and innate inability to fully describe a high frequency with resolution any where enough for our analog ears !!!!!!. It's all a bit controversial the analog versus digital isn't. But that's just it, it's not necessarily digital v vinyl, but digital v analog. I've got some old 1/2" mag tape masters - god they sound good !!!

My opinion is that digital should be better, but it is not yet. Scientists have not been able to really figure out what makes something sound good/better to humans. We have been measuring the wrong things as specification guides to performance, this has produceded better performance according to the specifications, but not according to the experience. Humility really dictates that we let the experience be the guide and let go of things we feel we have the control over.

tadgesualdo Absolutely agree. One day ....

all youtube files are digital and quantized.. very difficult to glean any accurate comparisons for this subject matter through this medium. (admitedly i still search and research sound design and production techniques here constantly but it is with a heavy grain of salt ie. knowing this will be different first hand all analog or not) just food for thought

I wonder if analog is just in general more natural and as a result more appealing in general. For example now we are learning that vinyl playback cartridges color the sound with distortions, but no one is complaining. Likewise most of the differences we hear in analog amplifiers is similar. In fact some distortions have effects on the signal that we look for in processing like compression of the signal.

Ha ha, no .... definitely !!

Hope you enjoyed the coffee !!!!!!!

It's very fascinating because when I have my speakers off, I can hear the vibrations in the tone arm itself very faintly. It sounds quite similar to the example you've shown.

@@ikindalikebowie Exactly. I always sort of thought "well gee, it's so small, of course it would sound like that" without realizing that no, that's really the effect of the EQ curve.

Sorry karl, but modern cutting lathes are _not_ sound-powered. It's not sound that goes to the cutting head, it's electricity. Perhaps you should stick to a topic that you have some clue about.

I would agree the comparison he made is nonsense because the sound is then re-naturalised by the record players sound board. Yes that's how the sound would be without any electronics, but record players have been able to accurately reassemble the sound since the 1960s. So while it may be a method of 'compression' to suit the medium, it does not actually take away from the original sound waves mastered.

Wrong.

***** Ah yes, but it's only a theorum, and of course it's still the case, that if SACD sounds better than red book, which most would agree is the case, I'd happily stand by my comment that red book, has insufficient resolution. Don't also forget, that equally well "proven" in theory and practice is that "instruments" & "voices" (in the most general terms) contain harmonic information well beyond Red books capability, and that, us mortals can detect it. I say detect rather than "hear" in the accepted sense of our hearing through our ears, and the accepted "audible frequency" range of 20 - 20k (or there abouts).

There's infinite possible frequencies below any given Nyquist frequency and only finite possible digital files of any given size so it is impossible to make a digital audio encoding format that can exactly encode any analogue signal. The Nyquist-Shannon theorem says that you can exactly reproduce any continuous waveform with discrete samples at a sampling rate of double the highest frequency, but the discrete samples need to have infinite precision and there is no such thing as an infinitely precise digital sample.

@@NetwideRogue Absolutely, and to clear up previous misunderstanding (my duff grammar) I was referring to frequencies over the 22 and a bit CD cut-off, which, while seriously down on vinyl, are still present with good cutteheads

It is rather isn't it ... but, here in the real world - or a cutting room with equipment running in the background .... Did you notice the sibilance on the track though. That's more to the point - particularly as it's a commercial cut, where, in an effort to get as much level as possible (and they have !) the "T's" on the word "to" are in quite a bit of trouble. You could of course argue that that's ok, and part and parcel of "vinyl attraction". Actually it wouldn't necessarily worry me, for a track intended for loud playback in a heaving club - but puritanically it's not technically correct.

Brilliant. Hope it all sounds great. Of course, your cutting engineer should be able to tell you if there's any issues with the master, but it's really good news that you've taken the trouble to "pre prep" for him, and vinyl. Let me know how it works out .....