Search results for:

Pretty sure summer just ended..

That was one wet morning on the bike.

Apologies for late night spelling mistakes

Ridigity isn't something you really look for when it comes to the properties of your speaker stands or the construction of your acoustic environment.
I used to build studios professionally and although I'm sure there are a range of methods employed I can talk through the approach we used to take and this will probably be relevant to most home user and professional studios.

Firstly what is the ideal acoustic environment, - an empty field with no walls and no wind ( and of course all the kit you could desire ) the reason for this is that the sound would escape and not return to you.

Most of us however listen to our music in rooms. This increases the amount of reverberation so it is up to us to taylor what reverberation we are happy with and what we are not.
If you are mixing music, the answer is you want all frequencies dulled equally - and this will be achieved both through having speakers with a flat frequency response and a room with a flat acoustic.
For home users it's not such a problem if your speakers have a boost around 3k as this generally sounds pleasing to the ear but you still want the bass to sound tight and the high frequencies to be precise.
When approaching both the highs and the lows there are two techniques, absorption and defraction. For the highs both work well as the frequency lengths are short. Try to break up the right angles in your room as this will discourage comb filtering - the process where a sound wave bounces back on its self and faulsely gives the impression of doubling up in volume, book cases are good at this..
For absorbing high frequencies, pillows, a few shitty art prints, anything to break up surfaces and add create permeable ardor bing surfaces with encourage the sound waves to slow down and bounce in random directions, thus reducing the chance of comb filtering.

When it comes the bass frequencies you're talking of waves up to an over 5 meters in length so rather that try and block them you have to focus on just moving them slightly. That's why sand or surfaces that aren't rigid work so well. When the longer and more powerful sound waves hot them they absorb the impact ever so slightly, move a little bit, and breakup the sound wave in the process..
Finally back to the blue tack we used to use some thing calked green glue which wasn't too dissimilar to add a semi solid rubbery layer for absorption between extra dense plaster board layers in studio walls so on my head that not too different to blue tack.

I imagine blue tac would actually be quite good, it has a certain viscosity so would be a really good absorber.. sand is better than concrete both in isolating the sound source ( there isnt any thing 100 solid for sound waves to pass through) and the small particles deflect the waves as they move through the sand.

Friday bump £710,,

First yes to the 303 set up a few posts up, all you need are the big ass tonnoys and you've the full 70's set up..

Secondly rather than spending on upgrading your speakers/ amps just improve acoustics
Avoid putting speakers in corners or near right angled surfaces.

To absorb unwanted bass boost and to tighten up the lower mids build wooden boxes just big enough to house a sand bag and place each speaker on one. The dense but movable sand is great cheap sound absorber.

When working out speaker placement test your set up with a range of songs to get an idea of how wide range of frequencies react and always try and keep the speakers at least 3 ft from a back way ..

Sorry if all of this has all been mentioned before..

Thursday bump £720

Wednesday bump £730

Tuesday bump £740

That Jersey reminds me of everything that was awesome/terrible about the early 90's..

Yep all sound advice, easy to get carried away when work just offer you free money schemes...

http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm?itemId=331332179470

Mal Rees track frame.
Classic London builder from the 60's

Sunday bump £750

Not that I have the slightest how they work but I've seen a bike - made by a guy in east- who builds fixed but with a two speed hub at the rear. If it's clean lines you're after I'd say it's not a bad thing to investigate!

Saturday bump down to £760

Sorry, looking to sell in one piece.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Cougar-Aluminium-Aero-Road-Bike-Frame-with-Carbon-Forks-/321527334865?pt=UK_Health_Beauty_Fragrances_Women_s_Fragrances_PP&hash=item4adc85c7d1

This is looking a good deal at the moment and if the size suits you it could be built up to be a beast of a winter bike..

Hey Chris - In response to your question I am North London - near Hampstead Heath.

OK so the serial number if F54 923.

F for Fierte

Size 54

number 923 made.

So I got there eventually...

Funnily enough the 105 was someting I have been thinking about, but best on the back burner until next year..
Regarding crank lengh I've got a range of crank lenghs on different bikes and I can definately feel the differences between them.They all have thier advantages. Having done a few months on the summer bike it does feel a bit odd on my shorter 170s but I will probably not notice that I was ever off them pretty soon.
I think it is important to view crank lengh as part of the overall picture regarding your gear chain, Cervelo have a good article on it.
[http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineering/ask-the-engineers/crank-length.html]

The idea of just changing the large ring does actually sound like a very relevent solution. I do find that with my current narrow casette and large outer ring I'm really not using the top few gears.

As I have a wider casette ready to go, this option would be a pretty cheap one to try first ( just one chain ring ). If however I'm feeling like I've not got the gears I need on the next ride, it's a short trip to the planet x website to get that compact.

EDIT I Measured the top tube wrong - it's a 54...

EDIT - after saying it can't be a 54 - guess what - it's a 54..

Sorry didn't answer that one! I'm based in London,

Thanks for the offer but I can't do an exchange on this one, If I sold my gf's bike and came back with more bikes I would be in so much trouble :-)

EDIT after even more mucking around measuring the head tube it is a size 54

Thanks Oswald your approach does seem like a good course of action..
That Sram ckankset is fugly but as you say it doesn't really matter on the winter bike and the ratios will suit me fine..

My 9 speed shifters have probably ( just about ) got a winter of serious abuse left in them so I'll give them one last chance to shine and most importantly, with a compact and a wider casette I should be able to match the range that I have on my summer bike.

The only problem with all of this is ..if.. I do evtually take the 10 speed campag off the nice bike and put it on the winter bike I'll have to buy a new 11 speed group set, which at current chorus prices is going to mean a more than a few pennies in the piggy bank..