Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?)

From	The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?)
Date	2025-01-17 11:10 +0000
Organization	A little, after lunch
Message-ID	<vmddrr$8tl$12@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(17 earlier) <6df1f0fc-b3e2-def0-f24b-d73c1f4654c9@example.net> <7mydndIrMYhsBRX6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <w26iP.425991$2xE6.132754@fx18.iad> <vmb5m4$3hp9n$2@dont-email.me> <CaadnYrkutW9bxT6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 17/01/2025 06:01, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> No. He (and his dad)  built his  own guitar, but I think the pickups 
>> were P90s. The amp was always a (number of)  Vox AC30(s), well known 
>> for a unique sound due to stuff you wouldn't be interested in
> 
>    Hey, we're tekkies here - we're interested in lots
>    of stuff  🙂
> 
>    From May's sound, it's clear the amp has a somewhat
>    exaggerated higher-end response with some interesting
>    harmonics. A lot of the older transistor amps had
>    a kinda 'hard' sound too and kinda heavier on the
>    odd harmonics. Dunno if that was inherent, or
>    by-design - intentionally emulating the AC30 sound.

The AC30 is a development of the original Mullard application note to 
use four EL84s - a small pentode - as a 25W power amplifier. Subesquent 
units used a pair of EL34s.

Being British, when it needed more gain, instead of adding an extra 
tube, they simply *removed the negative feedback* from the power amplifier.
You don't care much about distortion in a guitar amplifier.

Of course this had another effect, instead of just increasing the gain 
it increased the output impedance so much (~100ohm) that the 
loudspeakers were practically current driven, rather than voltage driven.

This had two effects. The first one was a result of the induction of the 
loudspeaker voice coil. Normally with a constant volatage, you get 
constant-ish output with frequency. But with a high impedance feed the 
loudspeakers got effectively a 6dB per octave treble boost all the way 
from somewhere around 1kHz. To tame this they added a simple 'tone 
control' that rolled off the treble only.

The other effect was that the loudspeaker cone was no longer tightly 
controlled by the amplifier - it was free to flap. And it so happens 
that the two 12" loudspeakers and the open backed cabinet had both a 
nice woodenish  cardboardy sort of sound and a massive bass resonance 
peak at around 100Hz, which is very close to and lies between bottom E 
and bottom A on the guitar.

All this made for a classic 'boom and chink' sound perfect  for the beat 
groups of the era, and all with as few valves (tubes) as they could get 
away with.

British amps sounded good because they were in fact BAD. Whilst a Fender 
is a reasonable copy of a hi fi amplifier of the period, British designs 
were over driven done on the cheap and had in many cases horrible 
distortion.

The Marshall being the prime example of 'all of the above'.  The classic 
'attack' is caused by the amplifier having plenty of HT voltage - until 
you want to sustain power. Then the mains transformers sighs and gives up.

So a 'power chord' has a sharp attack and then sustains at lower volume...

-- 
It is the folly of too many to mistake the echo of a London coffee-house 
for the voice of the kingdom.

Jonathan Swift

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-09 00:04 -0500
  Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-09 11:18 -0500
    Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-09 18:33 +0000
      Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-09 15:38 -0500
        Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-10 07:27 +0000
          Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-10 03:34 -0500
            Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-10 09:09 +0000
              Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 01:15 -0500
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 12:15 +0000
          Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2025-01-10 07:12 -0500
            Diversity - good or bad ? Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-10 21:17 +0000
              Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-10 22:45 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-11 01:11 +0000
              Re: Diversity - good or bad ? Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2025-01-11 05:23 +0200
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 00:48 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-11 07:02 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 09:00 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-11 19:50 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 19:19 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 02:02 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 22:19 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 06:51 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 11:09 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 20:46 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 20:48 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 00:43 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 11:05 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 11:49 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> - 2025-01-12 14:06 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 19:40 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-12 13:46 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 14:00 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-12 14:52 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2025-01-12 17:09 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 19:42 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-12 23:51 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-13 10:32 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 23:03 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-01-14 00:52 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-14 04:13 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-16 04:18 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-14 21:55 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 21:11 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-14 12:28 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-14 22:00 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-14 23:15 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-15 10:07 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-15 06:16 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-15 06:18 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-15 10:13 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-16 00:28 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-16 11:27 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-16 14:39 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-17 01:01 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-17 11:10 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-17 23:30 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-16 16:57 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-16 20:59 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-17 10:15 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-17 19:40 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-18 11:40 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-18 19:42 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-19 11:44 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-17 01:41 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-17 10:55 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-17 19:44 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-18 11:41 +0100
                Scandinavian Humor and Other Myths Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-18 14:46 +0000
                Re: Scandinavian Humor and Other Myths The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-18 15:03 +0000
                Re: Scandinavian Humor and Other Myths D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-18 18:07 +0100
                Re: Scandinavian Humor and Other Myths rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-18 19:36 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-01-12 18:53 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-13 13:06 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-01-13 16:17 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-13 20:51 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 20:23 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-13 13:40 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-13 17:08 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 00:31 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 06:33 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2025-01-12 17:06 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-01-12 18:53 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-13 10:16 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-13 10:51 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-13 20:48 +0100
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2025-01-13 16:17 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 20:24 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 21:32 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@proton.me> - 2025-01-12 21:47 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-13 02:41 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2025-01-13 03:00 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-13 13:47 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 22:56 +0000
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-12 23:29 -0500
                Re: New Pi 5 (Diversity - good or bad ?) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 06:24 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 10:23 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 00:44 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 02:10 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 11:53 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 21:03 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 10:56 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 12:13 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 09:21 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 14:58 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 00:44 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 11:03 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 19:36 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 20:30 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-13 10:20 +0100
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 04:32 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-13 12:03 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-12 23:42 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-13 10:38 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-13 13:11 +0000
              Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 12:04 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-11 19:52 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 19:21 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 02:23 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 23:00 -0500
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 06:59 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 10:46 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 20:54 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 10:44 +0000
                Re: Diversity - good or bad ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 10:39 +0000
          Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-10 22:15 +0000
            Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 12:06 +0000
              Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-11 20:00 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-01-11 21:57 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 02:33 +0000
                The Joys of Motorola Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-01-12 14:40 +0000
                Re: The Joys of Motorola rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 00:19 +0000
                Re: The Joys of Motorola "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 03:56 -0500
                Re: The Joys of Motorola rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 23:46 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 19:38 -0500
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 02:46 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-11 23:08 -0500
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 07:05 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-01-12 12:07 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-12 12:23 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-12 21:19 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 00:21 -0500
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-13 06:17 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-13 03:23 -0500
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2025-01-14 03:42 +0000
                Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-01-14 03:59 +0000
      Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-11 12:48 +0100
        Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-11 12:29 +0000
          Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-12 00:41 +0100

csiph-web