User talk:Donvr

Welcome...

Hello, Donvr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Thanks for your help at the Gramophone record‎ article!

Again, welcome! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 16:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

High fidelity vs. small rooms[edit]

It's possible to get good, solid low frequencies in small rooms. I will continue to delete your paragraph about small rooms and long wavelengths unless you work to define low frequencies as cancelling each other out by reflections in a small room that isn't amply absorptive at low freqs. It is absolutely false that long wavelengths need long spaces to 'develop'. Consider the tiny listening space within headphones. Binksternet (talk) 05:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I wondered about this paragraph disappearing (after a Wiki system problem though). I won't push this matter any further, because I threw away all HiFi-documentation pertaining to this many years ago. And one booklet still left in my possesion, the Philips guide on loudspeaker enclosure design only mentions its effect relative to the design for labyrinths or horns. (Possessing cut-off, as opposed to the theoretical infinite flat panel or "baffle"). The argument can also be made along the parallel with standing waves in organ pipes being present or not depending on its length. And a room can be considered as only one type of pipe enclosure. I have not made this up, but its relevance is not so high. Whenever I find something back I'll return. Regards, Donvr (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the subject after a discussion yesterday evening with an expert (AES contributor). Standing waves being built up contribute to the diffused wavefield that's needed everywhere for a faithfull reproduction. Direct sound constitutes only a very small part of the listening experience. That's why any performance in the open air missing sound reflections is much less gratifying to the ears.

Now to my argument: concert halls are of such large dimensions and exhibit such large delay times (echo/reverb) that very low frequencies are able to be present in the diffused wavefield. Contrary to smaller rooms like in homes, where the smaller dimensions prevent standing waves for very low frequencies. You only hear the direct sound of those. So my phrasing should have been: very low frequencies, where the room dimensions are below the standing wave for them (340 m/s divided by the frequency equals the wavelength), can not be just as faithfully reproduced as in larger concert halls. The lack of standing waves for those prevent a proper diffused wavefield for the lowest frequencies. This will not prevent direct sound reaching the ears, but listening experience is more limited. My error was in stating that those frequencies are non-existent, they're weakened... But good solid low sound reproduction remains your statement, not shared by me and my colleague.

A Dutch HiFi magazine HVT, contains a series of tutorials on audio reproduction from 2007 to today. In those articles, two statements were made and argumented by the Dutch TNO laboratory on sound recording and reproduction: 1) in principle any sound reproduction of a diffused wavefield in a concert hall can only be mathematically correct, when an artificial head dimensioned to the listeners head is used and reproduction takes place over a equally dimensioned headset (exact point to point reproduction of a mixture of both direct and indirect sounds from the original wave field) 2) if the second choice, reproduction of the sound wave itself is tried for, the speakers as point sources where only direct sounds originate from, should be helped by lots of indirect sound reflected from the walls of the listening room. This strongly influences both position and direction of the speakers with respect to reflecting surfaces like walls (point to multipoint reproduction) These articles as such do not adress specific issues for very low frequencies like I did, but endorse the principle of a diffused wave field as being conditional for faithfull reproduction. Other parts of these articles pertain to time differences between direct and indirect sounds in the listening room and its effects. These parts go beyond our argument and are not reproduced here Donvr (talk) 17:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added the free use rational twice: once before in the body of the file description and now again below. It explains exactly why it is free, since there is no real IPR-holder left:

Picture was taken outside Netherlands authority in international waters of the North Sea, where the pirate ship Radio Veronica was sending radio broadcasts to the Dutch audience. The Radio Veronica Enterprise has long been disbanded and its goals taken over by a publicly recognised other Veronica company, acceptable to the Dutch government. Never where there any actions taken towards the original enterprise or its persons involved in clandestine radio transmission other than confiscating of the radio equipment when this ship accidentally washed ashore near The Hague. Nor were any rights ever linked to the old Radio Veronica organisation.

More may be said on the shortlived subsequent RTL-Veronique company in Luxemburg, but this is also gone. I find the editing rules towards this kind of material very user-unfriendly and also quite difficult to find. Even how to upload pictures took me half an hour to find and succeed! Compared to my YouTube and Flickr accounts, the Wikipedia part costs me more in learning editing rules than in adding content. It is one of the reasons I made less and less contributions over the years.

Uploaded this picture again on june the 30th 2009, free from license sentence shortened drastically

PS. This picture is probably the last contribution of mine on phonograph technology. Donvr (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with no fair use rationale uploaded after May 4, 2006 which has been tagged as not having a rationale for more than 7 days.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ipatrol (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:All Balance PU arm on ship Radio Veronica -1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:30, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]