In UNIX and its derivatives, you can make an archive out of a bunch of files and folders, with a program called 'tar'. Originally, it comes from "Tape ARchive", as it was the program that would let you write data to tape drives. The tar command thus produces files called tarballs. If you unpack a tarball, you untar it.
UNIX is the only environment where you can get stuck in a tarball, get untarred, and come out clean.
UNIX is the only environment where you can get stuck in a tarball, get untarred, and come out clean.
Who are you directing to not locate the amplifier near the speakers? I know it's not me, because I never intimated I did, or would. I prefer the slope that gives me the desired result, myself. In this case it was adding bass with the amount of taper required for the summed output to be flatter than a bump in a limited frequency band.
It's not? Have you asked Earth if it identifies as a mother, father, or a pangender?
"tar" is a classic file packer program well known to the linux/cli community.
-x == extract
-v == verbose
-f == file, not a tape (TAR stands for Tape ARchiver).
Optionally, -z tells it the tape archive is conpressed with gzip, -9 tells it it's compressed with bzip
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_(computing) for more details.
Some of the finest speakers around, ATC SCM150Pro, -110 and -100, have the amps built into the speakers so it can't be that much of an issue.
Especially since they are better than their otherwise identical passive consumer counterparts.
That is literally the definition of an active speaker ie the only component between amp and driver is a piece of wire/cable. At least in Europe.
Speakers with a single onboard amp followed by a passive xover are called 'powered' and they are stupid (and thankfully rare) because they combine the all the disadvantages of passive speakers with the disadvantages of active ones.
Systems with built in amplifiers (in the box) suffer much higher failure rates. Cooling is compromised, and the components are subjected to vibration. Not great for reliability.
My decades of experienc bear this out, and yes I repair guitar amplfiiers as well. A "head" and separate speaker is more reliable, but not greatly so since the head also suffers from cooling issues - and they are not designed to be super relaible like say - a paging amplifier (thinking Bogen).
When I see live music at a venue, the bands invariably use screechy powered speakers. They plug right into the mixing board. There's no more sound man, no more careful mixing, just let it rip. The sound is all mashed up like a bad casserole. It is loud though.
Very few people care about sound quality any more. People love my system but they scoff at it too. A common question I get is why I can't build something like that in a tiny package. This is impossible to explain to the average person. They think sound is magic and the laws of physics are just a suggestion.
My generic explanation is "big speakers = big sound." It's possible to get big sound out of a smaller package but there's always compromises. The Grateful Dead were right to use their wall of sound. It's totally nuts but there's nothing like it.
Very few people care about sound quality any more. People love my system but they scoff at it too. A common question I get is why I can't build something like that in a tiny package. This is impossible to explain to the average person. They think sound is magic and the laws of physics are just a suggestion.
My generic explanation is "big speakers = big sound." It's possible to get big sound out of a smaller package but there's always compromises. The Grateful Dead were right to use their wall of sound. It's totally nuts but there's nothing like it.
@Fast Eddie D
Bravo!
I feel the same way about what you've described.
However, today's trend is all about small, lightweight, wireless, and of course impressive appearance.
The whole box could be full of crap, but as long as it's got a 'pretty looking' outside will make it sell.
Bravo!
I feel the same way about what you've described.
However, today's trend is all about small, lightweight, wireless, and of course impressive appearance.
The whole box could be full of crap, but as long as it's got a 'pretty looking' outside will make it sell.
Hi Bill,
Sure, no problem.
Generally speaking, where is most of the resistance between an amplifier and speaker driver?
Which signal level is higher, speaker or input signal? Input signals can run around phono cartidge levels and be audible, true or false?
Which signal is at the highest impedance and therefore subject to capacitive loading or noise pickup?
Okay, we'll use a balanced line. So, is that additional circuitry with it's issues, or an imperfect matching transformer?
Sure, no problem.
Generally speaking, where is most of the resistance between an amplifier and speaker driver?
Which signal level is higher, speaker or input signal? Input signals can run around phono cartidge levels and be audible, true or false?
Which signal is at the highest impedance and therefore subject to capacitive loading or noise pickup?
Okay, we'll use a balanced line. So, is that additional circuitry with it's issues, or an imperfect matching transformer?
I've seen active ATCs with built in amps (the large active ATCs house the amps in a rack away from the speaker) that had run every day for 40 years without breaking down.
depends how far your amp is from your speakers
I don't get the question
well all my gear is balanced just because I can*. Not sure about the issues but works for every recording we listen to as studios are all balanced. But in a domestic environment where it's rarely more than 3-5 metres from source to speaker there is no drawback in unbalanced runs of that length. The lower cost of interconnect vs speaker cable and no angst of any of the speaker cable things that can go wrong works for me.
* I also run at pro levels to the power amp. Again because I can. Whitlock solved the problems so I don't have to!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.