I desoldered some JRC4558D chips from an old Sony cassette deck and put them in my Eternity- and Blues Pro clones... (instead of the reissue NJM/JRC4558D)
Wow! I like em much better. More open, loose and a little more raw. ;D
So don't throw away old equipment: Take it apart!
I told all my friends to keep the electronic equipment ready for the bin for me! And also those light bulbs, as you may have read in the light bulbs topic! A lot of components can be easily reused...
Just discovered one yesterday on an old tape deck board...
yep!...my mates are always bunging me their old stereos..videos...etc....anything really...well handy..
i got hold of an old patchbay off one of them....loads of nice jacks...free..yay!... :icon_mrgreen:
If there IS any difference between the sound of the old manufacture JRC4558 chips and the new manufacture ones, I would have to say that it's due to manufacturing technology being better today than it was back then. According to my sources, the new ones are identical to the old ones in their design.
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 02:46:03 PM
According to my sources, the new ones are identical to the old ones in their design.
Yeah man, that's what i read everywhere also. But they really sound different!
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 03:30:04 PM
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 02:46:03 PM
According to my sources, the new ones are identical to the old ones in their design.
Yeah man, that's what i read everywhere also. But they really sound different!
Just wondering why that would be. :icon_wink:
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 03:41:06 PM
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 03:30:04 PM
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 02:46:03 PM
According to my sources, the new ones are identical to the old ones in their design.
Yeah man, that's what i read everywhere also. But they really sound different!
Just wondering why that would be. :icon_wink:
hmmmm they want it to sound different, so it does.
Quote from: caress on February 15, 2011, 04:06:12 PM
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 03:41:06 PM
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 03:30:04 PM
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 02:46:03 PM
According to my sources, the new ones are identical to the old ones in their design.
Yeah man, that's what i read everywhere also. But they really sound different!
Just wondering why that would be. :icon_wink:
hmmmm they want it to sound different, so it does.
Yes, I did think of the physchoacoustic aspect of it, and that was actually my first thought. The only way to really reliably test if there is any difference between new ones and old ones is to do some sort of blind taste test with a group of people.
Quote from: Paul Marossy on February 15, 2011, 04:28:05 PM
Yes, I did think of the physchoacoustic aspect of it, and that was actually my first thought. The only way to really reliably test if there is any difference between new ones and old ones is to do some sort of blind taste test with a group of people.
I'd be willing to bet that in a true double blind test no one would be able to reliably tell the difference between different types of opamps, much less between old and new manufacture JRC 4558s.
it basically all comes down to the tolerances when manufactured i'd imagine
I'm sorry guys! I am an audio restoration engineer by profession. So my ears are trained to hear even the tiniest differences in sound. Please believe me: i really hear a signifficant difference!
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 04:55:36 PM
I'm sorry guys! I am an audio restoration engineer by profession. So my ears are trained to hear even the tiniest differences in sound. Please believe me: i really hear a signifficant difference!
I do believe you. You really, really do hear a difference. It is very well documented by people who research human hearing that what you hear in your head is a very, very highly processed and messed-with version of what went in your ears, including inserting what you think you ought to hear. If you ever decide that you SHOULD hear a difference, then you absolutely will.
However, I would bet a modest amount of money that you would NOT be able to tell the "vintage" 4558 from a new one in a properly constructed test where you had to distinguish by sound alone. In fact, I've been party to a test where a group of professional guitarists - that is, people who make their living on guitar tone - could not definitively tell whether a real 4558, or other types of opamps were being substituted into the same pedal. Some claimed differences, but most said "no difference". The crucial difference in testing is making sure that you must distinguish between the test alternatives with only your hearing, no information whatsoever about exactly what is being tested at any one moment. It's the only way to keep personal biases, even unconscious ones, from affecting your perception.
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 04:55:36 PM
I'm sorry guys! I am an audio restoration engineer by profession. So my ears are trained to hear even the tiniest differences in sound. Please believe me: i really hear a signifficant difference!
Unfortunately, it's only a single, anecdotal data point, subject to bias since the testing was not blind.
Being an engineer, you could do the DIY community a great service by testing a group of 4558 chips, to include the ones in question, and present some data that shows where they, or any of the others differ. Then show and explain how any difference(s) have an audible effect on the signal in a specific circuit.
Also, being an engineer, doesn't it just drive you nuts not knowing
why two of the same chip seem to be different?
Who knows, the "better sounding" chip may have a flaw that gives it that "better" sound, but it slipped through the cracks in the quality assurrance department. Any difference in sound may be due more to happy accident than being vintage.
But until there's data......
ahh...nothin'.
I thought the difference mattered for a while there, it did.
Quote from: R.G. on February 15, 2011, 06:35:07 PM
It is very well documented by people who research human hearing that what you hear in your head is a very, very highly processed and messed-with version of what went in your ears, including inserting what you think you ought to hear. If you ever decide that you SHOULD hear a difference, then you absolutely will.
And thus there are many people out there who are profiting from this phenomenon of human hearing and perception. And it also gives birth to all sorts of fallacies propogated on the web. :icon_rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpTv2jAree8
Quote from: Electron Tornado on February 15, 2011, 06:42:37 PM
Unfortunately, it's only a single, anecdotal data point, subject to bias since the testing was not blind.
Being an engineer, you could do the DIY community a great service by testing a group of 4558 chips, to include the ones in question, and present some data that shows where they, or any of the others differ. Then show and explain how any difference(s) have an audible effect on the signal in a specific circuit.
Also, being an engineer, doesn't it just drive you nuts not knowing why two of the same chip seem to be different?
Who knows, the "better sounding" chip may have a flaw that gives it that "better" sound, but it slipped through the cracks in the quality assurrance department. Any difference in sound may be due more to happy accident than being vintage.
But until there's data......
I'm sorry I am not an electrical engineer. As an audio restoration engineer I restore old recordings. So I am not able to do extensive testing on the chips. But it would probably not show any signifficant difference from a technical standpoint. There is written a lot about that already.
Some people say you can't hear it, and some people say they can.
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 07:18:55 PM
Some people say you can't hear it, and some people say they can.
The main difference I've come across between vintage components and their more modern counterparts seems to be consistency!
Around 1985, I acquired a Minshall Model E organ from 1951 with a tone generator that featured 36 12AU7 tubes. I decided to build a better tone generator from 12 Fairchild µA2240 devices which consist of a 555 timer connected internally as an astable with 8 divider stages with open-collector outputs all in one package. I bought 15 devices just to allow for failures and I am glad I did. The 12 that were from Malaysia worked fine. The three from Korea didn't work at all once the board was connected. It may have been a matter of internal ground connections or a different foundry, but IC's from different places or times at the same place may have different characteristics.
The 4558 is a dual op amp based on the design of the µA741 which really does not have enough high-frequency gain to get consistent closed-loop response in the upper frequency range. Thus, the typical op amp connection does not necessarily allow sufficient feedback factor to stabilize high-frequency gain when the stage gain is high. You may get noticeable changes in treble response because feedback does not compensate enough to mask the differences. Slew rate may also change and may be important if the signal output is large or the gain is high like in a tube screamer. It also has a fairly high input bias current and this affects some designs as it may vary the bias point.
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 07:18:55 PM
I'm sorry I am not an electrical engineer. As an audio restoration engineer I restore old recordings. So I am not able to do extensive testing on the chips. But it would probably not show any signifficant difference from a technical standpoint. There is written a lot about that already.
Some people say you can't hear it, and some people say they can.
More to the point, I have seen and read about blind tests where people who, before the test, swore that they could hear subtle differences in this or that. After a blind test where they could not do better than random guessing about which was what, let alone which was better and how, they STILL maintained that they could hear the tiny differences that no one else could, in spite of the test results. They commonly held that the test setup was defective or that they were tricked or lied to about the results. The end result in the hifi field is that the Golden-Ear Subjectivist will NEVER submit to a test where they could be shown not to have the vast powers of perception they had convinced themselves they possessed. Some will even rant about the differences being too subtle to test. Once someone honestly believes they can hear delicate differences in this, that, or the other, it is nearly impossible to convince them otherwise. One really nasty thing to do to someone who is wholeheartedly convinced of their powers of discrimination would be to feed them the *same* audio sections, separated by a mild click and interspersed with one notably distorted "bad" control sample, but telling them that there are three different signals. I suspect they would almost always pick and choose between the identical ones as different. They'll almost never say they're identical. Just a guess.
People can perform amazing feats of digging signal patterns out of incomplete and inconsistent sensory data. They can and do also perceive subtle patterns in noise where there is no pattern.
So if someone tells you they hear something, you must believe them. It's real to them, whether anyone else can hear it or not.
I lost a substantial amount of sleep over this.
So what about nos tubes then? Or nos caps? Also bogus? What about if in my work, restoring old recordings, for example i hear a 50 Hz hum (in the Netherlands we have 50 Hz cycle current as opposed to your 60 Hz) do i really hear that hum or do i just think i hear it? Because i expect it to be there? Or tape noise or vinyl clicks? That would make my job a lot easier!
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 16, 2011, 04:08:44 AM
What about if in my work, restoring old recordings, for example i hear a 50 Hz hum (in the Netherlands we have 50 Hz cycle current as opposed to your 60 Hz) do i really hear that hum or do i just think i hear it? Because i expect it to be there? Or tape noise or vinyl clicks? That would make my job a lot easier!
I'm guessing that you digitize the old recordings and clean them up in software. Spectral analysis and the visual representation of the audio will show you the presence of unwanted content, so you have confirmation there.
You don't need to do any electrical testing of the chips, but perhaps you could play the same recording of clean guitar through the pedal and perform a spectral analysis to see what differences might exist. The only variable would be the IC.
A metaphysics discussion centering around the JRC4558D. Awesome!
-Aaron
Could the age itself play a role here? The mentioned IC´s have been used for decades, but do they age? Is it possible that certain parameters change their values?
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 16, 2011, 04:08:44 AM
I lost a substantial amount of sleep over this.
There is some initial discomfort over the concept. That should pass as you integrate the information.
QuoteSo what about nos tubes then? Or nos caps? Also bogus?
It depends. Does "NOS" mean "New Old Stock" or "Not Old Stock"? :icon_biggrin: Seriously, think about what you get if you get "NOS" tubes or caps or whatever. Even if you really do get something that was put on a shelf decades ago, and waited for you to come enjoy its sonic perfection, you have to wonder:
- If it was so good, how come it hasn't been used by now?
- WAS it ever good? How good? In what way? Oldness itself is not a virtue, even in single malt whiskys and wine. The basic stuff has to not only be good, but something that improves with age, or at least doesn't get worse. Aging electrolytic caps is a sure way to make them *worse*.
- there had to be some real difference between the modern replacement and the NOS part in the first place, and it had to be in the correct direction. And in my opinion, that something has to be at least possible to measure. A meter has no way to tell you about stuff that is NOT there. It may not see everything that is there and real, but it will never make stuff up that isn't there. (*Note to the proofreaders: yes, I know there is a whole class of meter errors and subtle problems reading them. I'm illustrating a point here.*)
Some NOS parts are fakes. Some never were good. All are sold on the same kind of promises that get ladies to buy new cosmetics.
QuoteWhat about if in my work, restoring old recordings, for example i hear a 50 Hz hum (in the Netherlands we have 50 Hz cycle current as opposed to your 60 Hz) do i really hear that hum or do i just think i hear it? Because i expect it to be there?
If you hear it, it may be there. Run the recording through one of the very widely available programs which will show you the spectrum. If there's a peak at 50Hz, then your ears told you the truth. The meter/program can't expect it to be there.
There is a widely recognized issue with some recordings being equalized to sound very good with the specific studio monitor speakers. What it sounds like with other speakers gets a little foggy.
QuoteOr tape noise or vinyl clicks? That would make my job a lot easier!
Trust, but verify. Think you hear tape noise? Go look. Clicks are easy. Is there a blip in the wave file or not? Use your ears for what they're really great for - finding suspicious places. Then use the tools to help you verify and dig out the truth. Note that your ears are not, and can not be calibrated. What does a head cold do to your hearing? A loud concert the night before? What does that do to your audio restoration? If you're not using some kind of tools, but just making it sound good, you're painting over the original. It may sound good, but it's a pastiche of old and new.
Quote from: roseblood11 on February 16, 2011, 11:03:26 AM
Could the age itself play a role here? The mentioned IC´s have been used for decades, but do they age? Is it possible that certain parameters change their values?
If either stored or used within their proper operating conditions, no, they will not age in your lifetime, or your children's. There is an aging process in diffused silicon that over centuries and millenia will "relax" the diffusion and the thing will quit working like it did. But this is a truly long time scale. If the ICs in question have been used in abusive manner, they will degrade: See "When Good Opamps Go Bad" at GEOFEX. However, the abusive aging is like arthritis or failing eyesight, not like a single malt whiskey maturing.
I kind of wish you hadn't brought that up. I've always NOT said stuff about this, because now the hucksters will start advertising "pre-aged vintage JRC4558Ds, carefully broken in on aging setups using only tropical fish caps, carbon comp resistors and oxygen free electrolytic copper, fed electrons from batteries over 10 years old. Only electrons were used to power the circuits, no other charged particles contaminated its power feed during the aging process. Packed in conductive foam laid back during the 1968 to 1978 period; special requests for packing foam will incur an extra charge."
Quote from: R.G. on February 15, 2011, 11:48:04 PM
So if someone tells you they hear something, you must believe them. It's real to them, whether anyone else can hear it or not.
I agree. Also, I have had guitar necks made using CNC machines and with everything being "identical" and sometimes they feel vastly different. I think people can observe (feel, hear, whatever) very tiny differences. Also, years ago I tried out a handful of different IC's and heard differences between a lot of them. They were 4558's, 4559's, TL072's, TL082's, etc. and I did not research anything beforehand. I had no expectations on how they would sound, but after the fact, I did do some research and my findings did coincide with what others have observed. For whatever that's worth!
But I think the real bottom line is that you can "feel" the differences more than hear them (much of the time), and that is pretty hard to back up with scientific data. And if you "feel" a difference and it makes you play a certain way, that's all that really matters. If you think wearing your "lucky socks" makes you play awesome, then rock on with your socks on!
-Joe Hart
Quote from: roseblood11 on February 16, 2011, 11:03:26 AM
Could the age itself play a role here? The mentioned IC´s have been used for decades, but do they age? Is it possible that certain parameters change their values?
Age itself, or different materials used in the manufacturing process? I mean, is every step of the manufacturing process of IC's exactly identical today as it was 30+ years ago?
-Joe Hart
Quote from: tg509 on February 15, 2011, 08:45:16 PM
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 15, 2011, 07:18:55 PM
Some people say you can't hear it, and some people say they can.
The main difference I've come across between vintage components and their more modern counterparts seems to be consistency!
I agree, but more so in transistors than in opamps. At least that has been MY experience.
Quote from: Joe Hart on February 16, 2011, 11:30:54 AM
Age itself, or different materials used in the manufacturing process? I mean, is every step of the manufacturing process of IC's exactly identical today as it was 30+ years ago?
**NO** part of the IC manufacturing process is the same as it was 30+ years ago. A semiconductor fab is too expensive to hold static. You improve materials, processes and process control as a continuous business process or the next hot-shot will outrun you. Slow down on improving your semiconductor fabs and you die.
It's like learning to start a fire without matches, skin an animal for food and clothing, and make improvised shelter; it's hard to find the information on how to do things that crudely. In semiconductors, it takes extra effort to make the same crudenesses, the same process mistakes, and so on that marked chips from decades ago. It's impractical to make them that badly. Not impossible, just impractical.
Quote from: R.G. on February 16, 2011, 02:47:13 PM
Quote from: Joe Hart on February 16, 2011, 11:30:54 AM
Age itself, or different materials used in the manufacturing process? I mean, is every step of the manufacturing process of IC's exactly identical today as it was 30+ years ago?
**NO** part of the IC manufacturing process is the same as it was 30+ years ago. A semiconductor fab is too expensive to hold static. You improve materials, processes and process control as a continuous business process or the next hot-shot will outrun you. Slow down on improving your semiconductor fabs and you die.
It's like learning to start a fire without matches, skin an animal for food and clothing, and make improvised shelter; it's hard to find the information on how to do things that crudely. In semiconductors, it takes extra effort to make the same crudenesses, the same process mistakes, and so on that marked chips from decades ago. It's impractical to make them that badly. Not impossible, just impractical.
But, wouldn't that also mean that they shouldn't be making 4558's today? Aren't there much "better" opamp alternatives today?
There's a video on youtube of a shootout between several chips on a TS, and i think the guy asked someone from the NJM factory and they said they were still made exactly the same way.
I just always think of this... http://www.rane.com/pi14.html (http://www.rane.com/pi14.html) and I'm glad that a google search turned it up and I didn't have to go find my old photocopy of a photocopy.
Quote from: Galego on February 16, 2011, 02:58:31 PM
But, wouldn't that also mean that they shouldn't be making 4558's today? Aren't there much "better" opamp alternatives today?
There's a video on youtube of a shootout between several chips on a TS, and i think the guy asked someone from the NJM factory and they said they were still made exactly the same way.
"Better" op amps? But how are they better? If a particular part meets the desired specs, provides the desired performance in the intended application, each part will reliably meet those specs and continue to perform over time and under a wide range of conditions, it's available and cheaper than others, well....why change?
Another way to answer the question is that the 4558 continues to be made for some of the same reasons we still have airplanes that use propellers and piston engines.
Quote from: Galego on February 16, 2011, 02:58:31 PM
But, wouldn't that also mean that they shouldn't be making 4558's today? Aren't there much "better" opamp alternatives today?
I don't understand your reasoning. At the bottom of this is the very real question: What is a JRC4558? Really?
The only possible answer is "it's a semiconductor chip which has the pinout and electrical specifications as listed in the datasheet". That datasheet does not list things which are attributed to the purported magic of the tube screamer opamp. All of the things that are supposed to make it magic for screamers are NOT listed.
It is entirely possible to make chips which more than meet the specifications in the datasheet on different/modified processes.
Are "better" opamps available today? Yep, absolutely, just as soon as you write down what "better" means. Faster? Yep. More voltage? Yep. etc. etc. etc. Howerver "same as the original JRC4558s" is not something you can test to (except by listening in a properly constructed blind test) or write a datasheet to.
QuoteThere's a video on youtube of a shootout between several chips on a TS, and i think the guy asked someone from the NJM factory and they said they were still made exactly the same way.
I was there at the shooting of that video, by the way. :icon_biggrin:
OK, I think it is time now to hook up this great sounding overdrive pedal between my guitar and amp, krank it up and PLAY!
1) I salute Groovemeister for his audio restoration skills and efforts. A noble calling if you ask me.
2) One of the elephants in the room is that any device that has been installed via soldering, then unsoldered, and re-installed somewhere, is NOT the same (or at least potentially not the same) as a device that is fresh off the line and never been soldered. (And please don't start any folk-legends about op-amps being improved by overheating! :icon_lol: )
3) One of the most common sources of misattribution in these sorts of comparisons is that people will find one or two examples of somethng, compare it to one or two examples of another thing, and then mistakenly assume that variation between the two things they have examples of is greater than the variation within each type of thing. In other words, Groovemeister may have heard precisely what he believes he heard, but the device he heard it from did not reflect the full range of variation in devices that share the same nominal characteristic. The analogy I like to use is that of thinking you know what the difference is between men and women by comparing a male hairdresser with a female Olympic weightlifter. They are different, certainly, but do they each fully reflect the entire range of their sex? Would you be accurate in saying that the woman has a thicker neck than the man? Probably. Would you be accurate in generalizing from those two to all men and women?
This latter dilemma faces us all the time. It is rare that anyone has either the opportunity or takes the time (should the opportunity present) to try out many many instances of the Thing A they wish to compare to the Thing B, whether it is chips, pedals, pickups, or whatever. That's not a personal failing, but I think it IS the basis of a lot of conjecture that, in the end, results in unnecessarily heated debates and unproductive rumour.
It's funny, I much prefer the older Malaysia RC4558P chips in Orange Squeezers but in a Tube Screamer the current production chip is better then JRC4558D old or new.
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 16, 2011, 04:53:30 PM
OK, I think it is time now to hook up this great sounding overdrive pedal between my guitar and amp, krank it up and PLAY!
Amen to THAT!!! I still can't figure out the difference between Coke and Pepsi!! Old, new, borrowed, or blue, just go with what sound good to you. I have an old Korg SDD2000 board, which had 5 JRC4558 chips on it. One "DD", and 4 "DV"'s. I've swapped them all around in different pedals, and I never really could tell any difference in the sound between them and newer 4558 chips. Then again, playing guitar at insane sound levels for years has effectively left my kids repeating themselves often at times, so I doubt I would pick up on the subtleties ;D
Cheers,
Dino
It's extremely common to compare the wrong chips; you need the Malaysia stamped chips only. You still might not hear a difference.
Hi
As Mark notes, comparing one chip with another seems to have legitimacy in this forum, but nobody would seriously compare one ford with one mazda and try to conclude which makes the "best" cars. Or one old ford with one new ford. Yep, it makes no sense at all.
Analysing the evidence :
1. In anecdotes, old is often said to be better than new.
2. In unbiased tests, the differences are often insignificant (ie either absent, or present but undectable, or detectable but inconsistent).
3. The inconsistency between 1 and 2 shows (irrefutably) that the differences are due to the test method (unbiased vs anecdote).
So, in the case of old vs new, anecdotes are strongly biased towards old. They offer a very poor representation of reality (but are widely believed for some reason - which I won't explore).
Of course, those who believe in mojo will claim that I have made and error or that they have been tricked, or that there's a whole subtle "thingy-ness" involving Kirilian maths and parallel universes that I am too dumb to understand. That's ok. Nobody said this was going to be a reasonable discussion.
cheers
Interesting thread...
What I find somewhat curious is comparing the sound of op amps in a distortion-producing device. I have reliably heard differences between op amps, though usually when comparing in a clean amplification scenario. I suppose that pushing things into distortion may reveal different characteristics. The JRC4558D is by no means a high fidelity op amp, as there are many superior parts available today. If seeking a more open sound, I would probably try something better. Can't say I've heard any difference between two specimens of the same part, however....
Quote from: digi2t on February 16, 2011, 07:42:52 PM
Quote from: Der Groovemeister on February 16, 2011, 04:53:30 PM
OK, I think it is time now to hook up this great sounding overdrive pedal between my guitar and amp, krank it up and PLAY!
Amen to THAT!!! I still can't figure out the difference between Coke and Pepsi!! Old, new, borrowed, or blue, just go with what sound good to you. I have an old Korg SDD2000 board, which had 5 JRC4558 chips on it. One "DD", and 4 "DV"'s. I've swapped them all around in different pedals, and I never really could tell any difference in the sound between them and newer 4558 chips. Then again, playing guitar at insane sound levels for years has effectively left my kids repeating themselves often at times, so I doubt I would pick up on the subtleties ;D
Cheers,
Dino
I think the "DD" version is supposed to be less noisy than the "D" version, otherwise I think they are pretty much the same.
Al
Hi
QuoteCan't say I've heard any difference between two specimens of the same part, however....
Different electro caps (same brand & spec) can cause differences in filtering applications. Typical tolerances are +50/-10 %, which is enough to shift a roll-off frequency by half an octave (e.g. 10 kHz vs 15 kHz).
Going back a few years, it was unlikely that two Ge transistors would sound the same (except when used in a buffer). Variation was rife, and components would sometimes be DOA. (OK, stop the old guy's rant now)
cheers
hey, if you hear a difference, and it sounds good, then go with it!
There was
=> ONLY ONE <=
batch of JRC4558DGC chips ever made. These had platinum and gold diffusion instead of the normal dopants. The yield from the wafer was 23 chips, and I have 19 of these. They make any pedal that uses them sound like either the angels singing or the devil snarling, depending on your mood. They're actually mood sensitive, and they can literally reach into your fingertips, using the electromagnetic fields they transmit down the shield of your guitar cord and PULL the magic music out of you, making you (at least temporarily) a better guitar player. I've scoured the world to be sure these don't fall into the wrong hands.
I will only sell two of them. Let the bidding begin.
:icon_biggrin:
R.G., et al :
I find this long going argument annoying for a couple of reasons. most circuits where people claim to be hearing magical differences between 4885's simply aren't very interesting circuits, and I agree that if you did a double blind test, the distribution would be random. overdrive ? distortion ? I've done a lot of chip-swapping with new chips, NOS chips, vintage chips, pulled chips... at best you'll hear some treble/bass differences, but nothing you couldn't tweak to on the pedal or guitar tone controls already.
however, there is one instance where I has seen a difference, and this was with the Electro harmonix polyphase. I have a original vintage one, and a clone I made. they sound sort of similar, but not really. when you crank the feedback up on both units, they have a completely different timbre. I concede that this may be due to some other circuit elements that I'm not considering, but really, the circuit is a cascade of 5 4558 chips functioning as allpass filters for the phaser, the rest of the circuit is just lfo/envelope generation.
the only thing I haven't done is try to desolder the 4558s out of the vintage pedal and place them into my clone. I would hate to damage them in the process and lose the sound of the unit.
Quote from: Rectangular on February 18, 2011, 12:58:03 AM
I find this long going argument annoying...
You think YOU find it annoying?
:icon_lol:
I like a regular 4558 inside yjm308! no mojo here!!!
The brain of a musician is a moving target as far as testing is concerned. They will unconsciously adapt the way they play to produce the desired sound from different equipment. There are a number of factors that simply aren't measurable or controllable that will impede or assist in this adaptation. There's nothing wrong with focusing on the physics and theory of what is going on, and that will likely get you most of the way there, but ultimately the human factor is inescapable. I'm personally kind of torn on how I feel about this too. As a tech, I can't help but want to eliminate all of this superstition, but as a musician, I think it's actually part of what makes great music happen.
-Aaron
I'm torn as well.
I KNOW this stuff shouldn't make a difference, but (I think think I've said this 3 times now...) I recently built a TS808 for a friend and I tried different op-amps just for giggles and between most of them there was not much difference.
Subtle differences here or there, but certainly not enough to raise an eyebrow.
I don't like Tube Screamers anyways, so it didn't matter to me one way or the other.
Then I put in a old Raytheon RC4558 (not even a JRC :icon_eek:) and man, it was DEFINITELY different.
Not like Marshall/Mesa different, but like 'I just changed my strings' different.
Trust me, I was NOT prepared for it and the only thing I could do is shake my head and box it up.
I didn't even tell my friend I had used a "special" part.
Better he remain blissfully ignorant...
:icon_neutral:
For the record, I also agree with the human factor here.
Just a twiddle of the tone knobs here or there, less or more gain, chorus or phaser, and I'm a different guitarist.
Neck pickup with a treble boost and suddenly I'm Stevie Ray or my last name is Allman.
Turn the bridge pickup to 11, scoop the mids and I'm Dave Mustaine or Dimebag Darrell.
Give me a Wah and a Whammy bar and next time I answer the phone I'm all "Jimi speakin' baby..."
Um... not really.
But you get the picture right?
Even if it's all in your head, that's where it COUNTS, man!
I'm-a go play now...
I'm with Mark. Misappropriation of the cause of differences is one of the biggest fallacies in this area. Someone hears a difference between two things and mistakenly assumes that it is due to something that sounds and feels good and gives them a warm fuzzy feeling when they say it- and yet is completely wrong. And so, internet myths get started, spread, and the beat goes on...
Didn't we have this discussion 12 years ago or something?...
Would it be possible to construct a "component test switcher" that would allow you to randomly switch between several components? I would imagine it to be a series of microprocessor controlled relays that would switch 8 inputs between several 8 pin sockets. There would be a "conceal" button that would randomly assign each component to a different activation switch, and a "reveal" button that would show the assignments on a lcd or something after you've finished testing. So you'd plug a connector into a socket on your pedal and then plug a bunch of alternate components into relay controlled sockets on the tester. Then you'd hit the "conceal" button, and test each sample device by pressing each of the activation switches, playing and listening. You'd write down your observations about each, then hit the "reveal" button at the end to find out which device was which.
-Aaron
Quote from: aflynt on February 18, 2011, 11:21:04 AM
...ultimately the human factor is inescapable.
Quote from: edvard on February 18, 2011, 12:06:46 PM
Even if it's all in your head, that's where it COUNTS, man!
Quote from: DougH on February 18, 2011, 12:13:08 PM
Someone hears a difference between two things and mistakenly assumes that it is due to something that sounds and feels good and gives them a warm fuzzy feeling when they say it- and yet is completely wrong. And so, internet myths get started, spread, and the beat goes on...
Didn't we have this discussion 12 years ago or something?...
Back when industrialization led to trying to figure out how to make workers more productive, when they figured out that making a guy carry 100 pound tubs of hardware to his work station and pull the work over to him by hand, after they had done the obvious stuff like making the work less tiring and the environment more comfortable, they dug even deeper into how to make the workers more efficient.
A notable string of studies looked into changing lighting; productivity went up. Then they changed wall paint color; productivity went up. Then they changed... to shorten this, practically everthing they did mad productivity go up at least a tiny bit. It took a while, but they finally figured out that if the workers knew you were trying to help them by changing something, they thought they could work better, and so they did.
It's the old idea that if you really believe you can do better, you can. This is the origin of a huge amount of human behaviour - sales motivation talks, coaches, cosmetics, and yes, to some extent the myths and legends of the JRC4558. If you think you sound better, then you do. You feel more confident and relaxed, and the music flows easier. Visions of Jimi, Eric, Yngvie, B.B., Django, whoever, dance in your head.
The only demonstrable magic that ever existed is and always was limited to being inside a human brain.
Quote from: aflynt on February 18, 2011, 01:01:41 PM
Would it be possible to construct a "component test switcher" that would allow you to randomly switch between several components? I would imagine it to be a series of microprocessor controlled relays that would switch 8 inputs between several 8 pin sockets. There would be a "conceal" button that would randomly assign each component to a different activation switch, and a "reveal" button that would show the assignments on a lcd or something after you've finished testing. So you'd plug a connector into a socket on your pedal and then plug a bunch of alternate components into relay controlled sockets on the tester. Then you'd hit the "conceal" button, and test each sample device by pressing each of the activation switches, playing and listening. You'd write down your observations about each, then hit the "reveal" button at the end to find out which device was which.
Yep, easy enough to do. But there are caveats, even here.
Something similar to this was done for hifi testing. When the Golden Ears found that they could not reliably distinguish golden sounds from brass sounds, they blamed the relays for "polluting" the sound and covering up the subtle differences, the "impure and excess" wires to/from the relays, the alloy composition of the solder, etc.
Notice that a good ear could tell the differences in the sound of the relays themselves clicking too. All clicks are not alike as to tone and loudness. The controller would have to do random testing order to keep the person listening from simply (and possibly unconsciously) memorizing the order of the relays. Doing a really fair test is not always easy.
QuoteSomething similar to this was done for hifi testing. When the Golden Ears found that they could not reliably distinguish golden sounds from brass sounds, they blamed the relays for "polluting" the sound and covering up the subtle differences, the "impure and excess" wires to/from the relays, the alloy composition of the solder, etc.
I can see how it would be impossible to convince anyone who was already inexorably vested in their superstition, but this presupposes that the components actually will all sound the same. What if you have components that could theoretically be audibly different and you would like a real world test of how those differences are perceived?
QuoteNotice that a good ear could tell the differences in the sound of the relays themselves clicking too. All clicks are not alike as to tone and loudness. The controller would have to do random testing order to keep the person listening from simply (and possibly unconsciously) memorizing the order of the relays. Doing a really fair test is not always easy.
Couldn't the relays be placed in a sound-proof box?
-Aaron
What the hell, I'll add my 2 cents. First I did my own test several years ago and noticed that where I stood in relation to my amp made more difference than any of the op-amps. So, if I didn't stand in exactly the same spot after changing them, they would all sound different. Some were noisier and had more or less pleasant noise, some smooth, some harsh, some had higher gain than others and would cause the guitar to feedback sooner of latter.
Minimally educated speculation. As long as things stay linear, I'm doubt I can hear the difference with my damaged old ears, but when things become non-linear, i.e. distortion, there may be differences in the harmonic content generated, i.e. harmonics/overtones, that I can hear. Since different op-amps have different spec.s and respond to resistance, capacitance, transconductance, bias, etc., i.e. Circuit Design differently, (isn't' that why there are so many different ones) there may be something going on that is audible. The different circuit design of the op-amps may distort differently, respond to overload differently, take longer to recover, etc. Those are measurable.
I have noticed that a higher level of even ordered harmonics seems to add midrange for example. I think I have a heard a swirl to the 4558 distortion that isn't present in some of the higher quality op-amps. I'm probably not a good test subject though. ;)
Quote from: WGTP on February 18, 2011, 03:02:49 PM
What the hell, I'll add my 2 cents. First I did my own test several years ago and noticed that where I stood in relation to my amp made more difference than any of the op-amps. So, if I didn't stand in exactly the same spot after changing them, they would all sound different. Some were noisier and had more or less pleasant noise, some smooth, some harsh, some had higher gain than others and would cause the guitar to feedback sooner of latter.
Aha! Now I think you have hit on something that is for sure a reality.
QuoteIt's the old idea that if you really believe you can do better, you can. This is the origin of a huge amount of human behaviour - sales motivation talks, coaches, cosmetics, and yes, to some extent the myths and legends of the JRC4558. If you think you sound better, then you do. You feel more confident and relaxed, and the music flows easier. Visions of Jimi, Eric, Yngvie, B.B., Django, whoever, dance in your head.
I know I play a lot better when I like the sound of what I'm hearing. That's a fact. So IMO people should use whatever they need to use to help them relax and enjoy playing more. If they want to believe in 4558's or anything else, it doesn't matter to me. Everyone's different, likes different sounds, has different preferences for getting them, etc.