Roumelio.

I know my Led Zep history, quite frankly you're wrong... Since the band had not yet signed their deal with Atlantic Records, Page and Zeppelin's manager Peter Grant paid for the sessions entirely themselves, meaning there was no record company money to waste on excessive studio time. In another interview, Page revealed that the self-funding was to ensure artistic freedom: "I wanted artistic control in a vise grip, because I knew exactly what I wanted to do with these fellows. In fact, I financed and completely recorded the first album before going to Atlantic... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Led_Zeppelin_(album)#Recording Quite frankly dead wrong. Led Zeppelin 1 was not recorded on Atlantic at all... I'm not sure if your multiple posts are attention seeking behaviour or what.

I was looking at one of those Behringers actually.

I stated how Led Zeppelin 1 was recorded and why it sounds the way it does. By most standards its a fairly average recording affair because it was recorded in the back of Mick Jagger's truck. That's the reality whether you like it or otherwise. It's a good album but by any standards the way it was recorded was terrible even by the then standards.

There were of course crossovers for this very purpose back in the day, some of them two way which are fairly average for modern setups. Some of them were three way... It seems they survive mostly for PA gear. It just doesn't seem like they make anything much for consumers these days. I don't blame them when most people just want two or three speakers in a box.

As with everything else it depends on the record and what was going on at the time. Led Zeppelin 1 was recorded in 1969 in the back of a transit van with the only multi-track recording being John Bonham's drum track because he wouldn't take that level of recording quality. These days didn't give a fcuk about recording quality. You saw them live at the gig or you didn't. If you're wondering why Led Zeppelin 1 didn't sound as good as the live performance... Well... It's pretty hard to make a generalisation over what was going on in the 1960s like that though. Not all artists are equal. A band like Pink Floyd that was much more anal about microphone placement inherently produces a higher quality album we listen to today and still say that sounds pretty alright. Of course it wasn't really until the 1970s that most people recognised Pink Floyd, once they did, they recognised their studio performances and live shows like nothing else for their atmosphere. Try listening to Pink Floyd's More album. Fleetwood Mac is another one that is worth listening to. There albums released in the 1960s are still of a significantly high standard that they are well and truly worth listening to today if you're into popular music of the 1960s. Their self titled album is very good. Everybody thinks of Fleetwood Mac and thinks of "Dreams" when there is so much more. In fact their recording of "shake your money maker" is a staple in my 60s rock playlist. My dad came out here from Europe in the early 70s and he was already listening to Led Zep, Fleetwood Mac, The Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Jimi Hendrix, we wouldn't pick up on it here as a whole in Australia for quite a few years later. People were still enamoured by Johnny O'Keefe. The biggest problem with Australia at the time wasn't really anything in particular except the tyranny of distance. Once we caught up most people did cotton on to these things, it just didn't happen overnight here. As my dad said when he first came here to Australia in the early 70s Australia coming from Europe was like stepping into a museum.

60hz to 20khz, they'd be good but not great for less than $100, not exactly full range by todays standards but full range is hard to do without a three way, which you can't fit in a bookshelf. I may watch them, just to get a comparative idea of how they stack up against my Rogers Export monitors. It's been a long time since I've heard a set. I remember them being of a fairly similar sort of vane. Good for jazz, female vocals and airy music.

It depends who you know, not what you know. As people get used to the fact that they would rather replace modern components as they age out or blow up rather than repair them. The job of the small electronics technician becomes less viable. The more people who know how to fix an LCD TV these days, the less people who know how to fix a 10 year old receiver. The way people want receivers with bluetooth, and wifi, and HDMI and USB these days, receivers don't stay relevant in the modern home very long either. The day of the pure stereo receiver is coming towards an end. Less R&D is put into this more into whiz bang home AVRs. The thing is I already know a tube stereo technician so I'm good. You'd be best getting to know someone who is good at fixing things that you can call a mate rather than looking in the yellow pages for a small electronics repair shop. Particularly where I live right now such a thing does not exist, or they want $150 before you even begin to tell whether they're any good at what they do.

Quite indeed

It's changed to 230volt apparently.

Conrad Johnson HV1 that price though, and in Russia. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Conrad-Johnson-HV1-Nuvistor-Phono-Pre-preamplifier-2-New-Nuvistor/272788206383?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

All phono preamps take care of cartridge capacitince loading to some extent otherwise they would sound very very bad. I'm trying to read between the lines of what is different about this preamp. This page describes capacitince loading quite well. But what the audible effects of capacitance loading are can be a little counter-intuitive. Small amounts of excess capacitance will reduce the highest frequencies that a system as a while can reproduce. Therefore as a result you may well expect a duller sound (I guess this is some of what this device hopes to achieve by removing). However, this isn't what usually happens as a whole. In a factual sense, although the very high end is reduced, there's an increase in the upper-midrange/lower-treble region ( perhaps something like 8kHz-12kHz?) which makes the system sound brighter in theory. However, the brightness of the sound is usually counter intuitive to peoples hearing, because excessive brightness will become tiring after a whee little while. On the other hand if we remove a large amount of excess capacitance the whole sound of the system will become more than a little dull. Naturally while small changes in capacitance loading should have only have a fairly subtle effects on the sound. You would need to get it wildly wrong (probably more than is possible with a normal phono stage) to make a dramatic difference as an audible effect from capacitance loading by itself so I'm not sure what else this phono amp is doing. Some further explanation would be nice.

Tempted but I have no spare money at the moment. These are the LS3/5As with more bottom end. https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/maroochydore/other-electronics-computers/rogers-ls7-hi-fi-speakers-deceased-estate/1145176975 Abut $300 under value of what they're actually worth.

The RIAA standard (of which there are two actually with a later updated RIAA standard) is the standard by which one should expect a record to sound regardless. It's the "Red Book" of record standards, prior to which we had a whole bunch of separate standards, nothing was settled. Of course, whether or not you want to comply to what the standard is, is another matter altogether. Personal choice means you can listen to music however it is you think suits your ears best, but it wont be as the engineer intended it. That said the engineer might have gotten it right in his studio but that doesn't mean he got it right for your room.

Good question, I'm also looking for decent Aussie suppliers for active crossovers at the moment for a project I'm thinking about. I'll be watching this thread.

It's also understand as a 12AX7 and 6BM8. The 12AX7 is probably one of the more familiar valves to guitar amplifier enthusiasts. Pretty much a whole lot of amplifiers used them in the 1960s and 1970s including some of the more familiar Fender black and silver face amplifiers of the time such a the twin reverb. Here's a simplified schematic.

Just about anything should be a remarkable improvement over Chinese valves. They're not the best.

It's an interesting little amp, it has no real character of its own which is what intrigues me about it. I've had a couple of different things hooked up to it including a set of Yamaha NS10s. I have a set of Rogers export monitors hooked up to it at that moment which gives a very nice sound for classical music and jazz. No hums no buzz, no nothing. It's kind of just flat.

A part of using a valve amplifier is valve rolling and beginning to understand how different valves impact your amplifier. It's quite fun to get into. Each of us hear things differently. Be prepared to stand by the power switch if you're going to start rolling Russian valves though.

No, they're not fine to use at all it's a completely different tube. You should replace them with a set of new old stock ECC85s preferably Siemens or Telefunken, perhaps Valvo or another German brand if you want something of decent quality, perhaps even a Mazda. All of those are good brands if you care about the sound. Mullard or Phillips are also OK after that in that particular order. I would avoid Russian copies they're standards are not exactly the same regardless if the socket fits and they may not work as intended. You may end up turning your amplifier into a sparkler show rather than an amplifier.

I've been looking at CJ valve preamp for a while now to fatten up my Pioneer valve amp which is sounding. Mostly I was looking at one for when I wanted a warmer sound. They make some good gear, particularly there older stuff for this purpose.

I was thinking about some kind of coaxial speaker. In the end I don't know whether its better to just implement a separate horn altogether. Actually it's not that I don't know, it's one more thing to think about. I realised a while ago unless I'm going to go out and by something such as a Zu Cube I'm going to have to tackle this one from scratch or just sell the amp I have currently and get a new one. Thing is I've actually grown to like this little Pioneer tube amp I'm currently running and I like a good challenge to get things out of small amps people don't expect to get much out of. I know I could run something like an Alnico or Celestion Blue from my experience with guitar speaker cabinets, they would get loud enough but they don't deliver very well for hifi. Or I could look for something elusive like a JBL L100, or Pioneer HPM-100 equivalent copy and good luck finding one of those here in Australia. Problem is not a lot of the high quality, high efficiency vintage stuff was ever sold here in Australia. The thing is wanting to do something with modern components, because the reality is they deliver something that your hard pressed to get out of the suitable vintage speakers if you can find them. Time to do some more research and think about what kind of drivers are actually suitable first. I have some suitable Rogers vintage speakers now and they're nice, but you can't help but think about the 40 years of speaker development afterwards since 1976 and actually think you might actually be able to do a little better.

Hey nice blog.

This should be the stamp location on a Rogers/Dalesford speaker. Not sure if this translates to the later KEF speakers.

I'm chasing something elusive and DIY at the moment myself and probably looking at a DIY kit also. I do like my Rogers Export monitors particularly for jazz and classical but I'm looking for something with more kick in the pants that can only be achieved with more noise. Given I have a 15watt valve amplifier this is no small feet. I'm looking for a decent full range speaker that will deliver the goods. New or old and size factor is not really an issue. Ideally I'd be looking at something around 95db efficiency give or take. The elusive part is finding something that avoids the necessity for a crossover and matching speakers in terms of phase as well as frequency. I wonder whether this is easily achievable or not.

If I was to open up the baffle from the front on my Export monitors the date of manufacture would be stamped on the speaker itself. I have an 8ohm pair of export monitors manufactured in 1976 as the stamp says on the speaker mount which would put my Exports at a time where they were still using Dalesford speakers.