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

Lt. Bob said:
nope ..... big dollar audiophile gear semi-frequently uses such pots.
Click to expand...

We know why that might be important to keep Stereo L&R channel balance, but what you said was;
.."strictly for audiophile playback gear"

That is far from accurate..Studio, Lab, or home, not everyone is willing to pay for that. That's why your average duffer never hears of it.
 

Attachments

  • 476b.jpg
    476b.jpg
    41.6 KB · Views: 95
Stepped attenuators with tight tolerances are pretty common in mastering gear where repeatability and perfect imaging are important. Mic pres with stepped pads are not as common, but can be nice when repeatability is important also.
 
It can be tailored to what suits. The switches at the plant I mentioned before (from 1968) where doing up to 69 positions - as a quick calculation ?? What common appliance needed 69 steps back then : ) I imagine they did some higher res switches that I never saw, or, paid attention to, as they bought enough gold and sliver.

Well, what type of attenuator mechanics are more reliable and easier to clean
 
garww said:
We know why that might be important to keep Stereo L&R channel balance, but what you said was;
.."strictly for audiophile playback gear"

That is far from accurate..Studio, Lab, or home, not everyone is willing to pay for that. That's why your average duffer never hears of it.
Click to expand...
there's always exception to everything but i understand you're always in 'gotcha' mode
 
  • Like
Reactions: RFR
For the record, audiophile always means to me a gullible person who pays over the odds for audio "benefits" not supported by measurements or science.

Labs would obviously go the other way and studios can go either direction.
 
Lt. Bob said:
there's always exception to everything but i understand you're always in 'gotcha' mode
Click to expand...

Just explain the reason for your narrow minded statement; "strictly for audiophile playback gear", then ? What would possess you to make a statement like that ?
 
garww said:
Just explain the reason for your narrow minded statement; "strictly for audiophile playback gear", then ? What would possess you to make a statement like that ?
Click to expand...
first off narrow-minded means exactly nothing in this context .... like most of your posts.

I'm not gonna play your game .... you insult people with no reason and then act mystified when they respond in kind.

you're the one that originally said such things didn't exist even though you obviously knew they did .... you did that just so when someone posted about one like I did, you could insult them.
Somehow that makes you feel superior .... it actually makes you laughable.

.... I simply showed an example of such a pot and said they're not good for mixing and IMO they're not .... having discrete steps doesn't work well in a mixing situation where you may very well need levels between those discrete steps. Others may disagree and that's fine .... having an opinion is not the same thing as being narrow-minded.

Now .... that's my opinion and I don't need to justify it to you .... maybe show me you have some small amount of talent for something besides insulting people and we'll talk ..... otherwise you're just a troll.
 
Ya, I was already laughing at post #3;

"Tell us where you got this info so we could flag the source as unreliable".


Lets get that ox-bow lynch mob together : ) The thread was almost on-track by messages 74 to 80, but there is a tendency to toss fader resolution in there, and again, ref media dynamic range as audio dynamic range. etc..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top