Page 2 of 2
Re: Glass instead of mica for reproducer rebuid?
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 4:11 pm
by bigshot
The only way to compare a subtle difference would be to have two identical machines side by side to do a direct A/B comparison. Human auditory memory for similar sounds is as short as a few seconds, and expectation bias is a huge influence as well. If the difference between the two isn't great, as much time should be put into setting up a controlled listening test as into fitting the machines with diaphragms.
Re: Glass instead of mica for reproducer rebuid?
Posted: Wed Oct 13, 2021 6:44 pm
by mrrgstuff
bigshot wrote: Wed Oct 13, 2021 4:11 pm
The only way to compare a subtle difference would be to have two identical machines side by side to do a direct A/B comparison. Human auditory memory for similar sounds is as short as a few seconds, and expectation bias is a huge influence as well. If the difference between the two isn't great, as much time should be put into setting up a controlled listening test as into fitting the machines with diaphragms.
Whilst by no means perfect - it is possible to overcome human auditory memory to a certain degree by comparing recordings made by different soundboxes / reproducers on the same machine. I have made several tests like this - splicing together the recordings to help the comparison. One example is here:
https://youtu.be/Me3WSV9OF9c
Re: Glass instead of mica for reproducer rebuid?
Posted: Sun Oct 17, 2021 10:04 pm
by Jonsheff
I certainly wouldnt substitite anything but original material for one of my restores for resale but might try it on my personal Victrola XVII. I wonder if these guys can put the hole in the middle for the screw? Corning Gorilla Glass wafers
https://valleydesign.com/gorilla-glass-wafers.html
Re: Glass instead of mica for reproducer rebuid?
Posted: Tue May 16, 2023 6:13 pm
by BassetHoundTrio