Resolution of sound decreases by pulling down faders .....is there any such concept ?

Ask any electronic man. He wil confirm that using faders will go wrong if you put them to low or to high. Has to do with how there technically build and implemented. Specifications. So it is to be recommended to use them between (estimated, not looked up) 1 and 9 to use them in full.

Well, if I meet Commander Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation I'll ask him since he's an electronic man.
 
I see Garww was off the leash long enough to do what he does best - make no sense whatsoever.

At least someone else sees it; thought it was just me maintaining that position. Not sure where he gets his information from with most posts, but I'll declare I know nothing about what you're discussing. Just here for the free gifts!
 
"Ask any electronic man. He wil confirm that using faders will go wrong if you put them to low or to high. Has to do with how there technically build and implemented. Specifications. So it is to be recommended to use them between (estimated, not looked up) 1 and 9 to use them in full. "
Well, I am a specific electronics man 42, will I do?

The 'simple' attenuator is in fact anything but, but unless the equipment designer was very dense (or had a VERY low budget) they work fine at any setting.

The complications arise when we don't know the source and load resistances/impedances. Worse case OPR for a pot is at 6dB when the wiper is at ELCTRICAL half way. If we assume drive Z is zero then R out is 1/4 track resistance, 2.5k for a 10k pot. You would not want to put a LOT of screened cable on such an output if you want to preserve a response just 0.5dB down at 20kHz. However, such a pot INSIDE equipment will have little to no HF loss.

But! CAN we assume a very low drive R? With modern gear, pretty much. Most things have a source R around 100 Ohms but some guitar amp line outs and some pedals can be 1k or more.

With the pot at max the only problem is with the headroom of the following stage. It is possible however by VERY bad design that such a stage will have a low enough resistance that it adversely loads the drive stage..Not likely.

The exception to these rules is the guitar amplifier (as is often the case!) The pots tend to be very high value, 500k-1 meg and capacitances, internal cables, triode grids, proportionately high so backing of a pot can make things get 'dimmer'. This is where the 'speed up' capacitor comes in.

Dave.
 
For the few who got insulting. I don't like that. Don't accept that.
Can be i don't understand u, but i think you don't know either about what i'm explaining.
To bad that's the way some react on misunderstandings. I will remember that/those.

Now i'm going react serious on a serious reaction....

Well, I am a specific electronics man 42, will I do?

The 'simple' attenuator is in fact anything but, but unless the equipment designer was very dense (or had a VERY low budget) they work fine at any setting.

But i think you must acknowledge that no one can design the tolerances of the pot exactly. Cause when one designs within those tolerances the pots don't work at highest possible performance. Those tolerances are not fixed and therefore not to be fully designed/ One can't calculate an unsure factor. Those tolerances always bring problems at beginning and end (production), and therefore good to advice to never reach those ends.

Yeah off course, in highly expensive boards with pots with ignorable tolerances used this will be ignorable. But not in the boards which most overhere have which have 'normal' pots build in with tolerances. Especially not the cheep digital versions.
Then it is not a bad advice to not reach those ends.

I don't know if i get the right words to explain what i mean, but i guess you as specific electronics man will understand where i'm going.
 
I will remember that/those.

:eek:

Now i'm going react serious on a serious reaction....


So what you're saying here then, is that on really cheap mixers with really cheap faders...the tolerances are not that good.


WOW!
That's some serious reaction and observation! :D

The reality is that on most decent mixers...there is NO signal degradation at low or high fader positions....only fader resolution is affected at the very low positions.

I can only assume that your experience has been mostly with the really cheap stuff...and that's why you think how you do.
 
ecc83 said:
The 'simple' attenuator is in fact anything but, but unless the equipment designer was very dense (or had a VERY low budget) they work fine at any setting.

So given that I know relatively little more about electronics than how to solder and that plugging a speaker out into a line in might do bad things,* I pulled all of the channel strips out of my board a while back. I took the covers for the faders apart and released the little clippy thingies holding the slider dealie in "action mode" or whatever. Then I cleaned all the crap off the plastic strip things with DeoxIT F5. I ground a broken tap (not sure what size, possibly M10x1.25) into a swage tool to pound the things back together. **

It seemed to increase the resolution. ***

So does this type of fader device act like a typical variable resistor/potentiometer with specific ohm values and all that? Doesn't really look like there's much to it.





* - when you see the magic smoke come out, it's bad

** - I do not recommend this procedure to home recordists, or anyone for that matter, although it worked for me

*** - not really, all it did was get rid of the horrible crackling noises and make the faders quiet again
 
You mean like a glorified trim pot : ) In theory, you could hard wire 100 steps and toss the fader
 
Yeah? How would you control those 100 steps? The fader smoothly goes through those steps.
How would it be handled if hardwired?
Lol.?
 
Yeah? How would you control those 100 steps?

One step at a time... :D

If you made the steps in very small volume increments...like 0.1 dB...it would be OK for pure level control, but it would suck for actual on-the-fly mixing moves.
 
Lol.?

This thread has been rapidly turning into another all time great, useless, goofy ass thread
 
Yeah? How would you control those 100 steps? The fader smoothly goes through those steps.
How would it be handled if hardwired?
Lol.

The mixer strip isn't all that different than a stand-alone preamp with stepped level controls. Go buy one and find out.
 
Yeah so what? I have gear with "stepped pots"

You're saying "hardwire 100 steps"

Good. Now how do you propose to control getting to the next step without a pot or fader? 100 switches?

I realise you said "in theory", but you didn't take it all the way through.
:D
And ps. Why should I buy a piece of gear just to figure out what the hell you're talking about? :) wouldn't it be easier for you to just explain yourself? :)
 
"
I don't know if i get the right words to explain what i mean, but i guess you as specific electronics man will understand where i'm going. "

No, not really 42 but we shall keep trying!

The only electrical tolerance a single potentiometer has is the absolute value of the track resistance and for almost all pots intended for audio work that is +/-20%. That might seem vast considering 1% metal film fixed Rs are found in even the cheapest designs but in fact, for audio it does not matter a jot. Whether a pot imposes a load of 8k or 12k on the preceding drive amplifier matters diddly.

For GANGED pots for stereo level control important tolerance is how well the two sections track, dB to dB through control rotation, even a 1dB variation in L/R level can cause audible shifts in the sound image and even quite expensive pots are not that good over much more than a 20dB range.

Fortunately, for the bedroom wannabe/projjy recordist, this matters little because their choice of musical genre rarely needs image placement precision. They are hardly ever doing 'proper stereo' anyway!

N.B. Neither of these 'tolerances' have any impact on sound QUALITY, e.g. distortion.

Dave.
 
:eek:

So what you're saying here then, is that on really cheap mixers with really cheap faders...the tolerances are not that good.

All pots have tolerances. Even expensive ones. And those tolerances aren't to be calculated within an electronic design. They simply are there

The reality is that on most decent mixers...there is NO signal degradation at low or high fader positions....only fader resolution is affected at the very low positions.

The reality is that it really looks like you never heard about (resistance) tolerances on pots within there production. Tolerances where they do there own thing which is not to be controlled fully. Tolerances which influence most at full high and full low.
The reality is that you react on something you've got no knowledge of. But as you never heard from it, doesn't say those productional tolerances don't exist.

I can only assume that your experience has been mostly with the really cheap stuff...and that's why you think how you do.

Again you're wrong. :facepalm: You assume more then you have the necessary skills for it to assume right.
The only thing within this subject that's cheap is you. View attachment 99485

Foolish of me that i've opened your ignored reaction. Shouldn't have done that.
But what's you're problem man? Why you keep trying to make a fool out of me? Leave me alone. And that's a message for RFR too.
 
Foolish of me...

Why you keep trying to make a fool out of me?

:D

You're just rambling now.... "tolerances where they do they own thing".

If you read my post instead of just rambling...you could see that I never said they don't have any tolerances. I said that they come in different tolerances...depending on cheap or expensive.

Electronic components can be, and usually are, built with specific tolerances. You can buy a cheap fader with wide tolerances, or an expensive one with very tight tolerances. I should know, having done full console refurbish, full re-cap, re-chip...including new faders....not to mention lots of other studio electronic repairs.
There's a difference between 20%, 10%, 5%, 1% tolerances...and you control the performance by what you use. You select the components that fit the design...and/or your budget.

What exactly do you base your perspectives on...since several people here have pointed out to you that you are wrong...?
 
Back
Top