That building is an example of the cheapest construction methods available at the time it was built. Wood floors, brick, timber frame and the labour to do it was all the lowest cost you could get back then. Windows on all four sides because... beauty? No, to let the light in to light the space. Shocking to think it, but they didn't have the same lighting option back then that we have today. Widows, even back then, were cheaper than a finished wall section. Today wall sections are high efficiency to save heating and cooling energy costs, so that's why there are less windows in industrial buildings.
@@Albet27 I majored in building - I'm a carpenter, so I know this from a practical point of view, not an academic one. Glass at the time this building was built was a large industrial process - float glass - and fairly cheap in comparison. Windows were made in factories not unlike the one this building used to be. What I'm saying is that there wasn't anything particularly special about that building at the time it was built. The owners of the building were just as interested at that time with keeping cost down as owners of factories are today, so putting on a pretense of higher quality and not building to squeeze the blood out of each penny is not true. The building is just an example of the level of building tech available at that time, in that area for the money it cost to build.
@@Albet27 Glass is cheaper than walls and has been for the last 150 years. The reason why is that glass is made in a factory with fixed costs and no downtime due to weather, while walls are built on site by skilled workmen of several different trades out in the weather. Glass is one thing, while a wall section is many different things put together by different people on a building this large - carpenters, labourers, masons, etc. You sound like you haven't actually built anything, yet think you can hold up your end of an argument with someone who has.
@@clickbeetle2720 Google float glass, bud. It's been in production for well over 100 years. You, like the previous commenter who deleted his comments, know nothing about this.
Thanks so much for doing these videos 🥳 I think there are very few in the industry that´s got any clue what you are doing, but I love it ..... passion, music, extremely wonderful experience 😎🥳🤠 I really want one of these Idler drive decks Jonathan..... would you sell to me? .... this is the coolest thing 😍🥰😇😎 (I would never be able to afford K3 or K5 😓) I think 99% of the turntables sold today are completely scre#$## up, we need direct drive or idler drive, belt drive never did it for me, something missing there 🤐
Tower of full range open baffles? Not the most elegant, but it could be made so, and its just as simple and perfect as it gets, i think. You get for each channel 3x sensitivity increase, and responce, because moving mass, more air contact area, and more dispursed comprised wafefront. Im sure you can make it with no crossover. Honestly, they should be high resistance coils in series for no tube output transformer!!! It drives me nuts most people have not done it this way. But its a fairly involved process making coils, i guess. thinner wire and more turns. Lol thats all there is to it, to eliminate a complex part like an output transformer in an amplifer. Jesus christ, you could even run it on 120v and a doubler diode capacitor circuit to get to 400v. Then its only a driver tube and a power tube and a few resistors and capacitors. Its so simple. It could be put onto the speaker system, instead of making a whole dang nother chassis and cabling system. Would just run 2 cords, and interconnect signal in. Or in this day and age, lossless wireless music transfer, but i think in actual execution, wireless anything is very lossy. The 3 drivers and 2 tubes per channel can be more expensive, like emissions labs or old siemens stuff, they are spectacular creations. The baffle can be a slab of live edge wood, and the frame or leaning stand can be plated brass. The adjustment for aiming should be ultra fine, micrometer like adjustments, and dampening materials should be considered, wool or felt would be nice. But with 3 speakers per channel, the wavefront is so large you dont have to worry about perfect symmetry. 12 inch full range alnico whizzer cone speakers, diatone clones, made in china, are actually very good, I found they can make those fairly well. The pair is 700 delieverd, so 2100 in speakers makes sense, Honestly it would be best for reference system to use speakers even higher in quality but those are not tooo common these days, in very minute particular excellent development. Lots of trialing, listening, adapting and material selecting. For starters, diyers can afford 2100 in speakers, and can make a baffle and frame for say another 1000, WIth that setup, the distorition would be record low, the responce would be sharp as anything, and the overall volume would be spectacular. with low distortion, it would make for reference, or would actually work in any application like theaters, or live events. The best way is open baffle when outdoors. Its a shame how much time and money is wasted in making boxes. -god.
I think I want to become a Fleetwood employee
That building is an example of the cheapest construction methods available at the time it was built. Wood floors, brick, timber frame and the labour to do it was all the lowest cost you could get back then. Windows on all four sides because... beauty? No, to let the light in to light the space. Shocking to think it, but they didn't have the same lighting option back then that we have today.
Widows, even back then, were cheaper than a finished wall section. Today wall sections are high efficiency to save heating and cooling energy costs, so that's why there are less windows in industrial buildings.
@@Albet27 I majored in building - I'm a carpenter, so I know this from a practical point of view, not an academic one.
Glass at the time this building was built was a large industrial process - float glass - and fairly cheap in comparison.
Windows were made in factories not unlike the one this building used to be.
What I'm saying is that there wasn't anything particularly special about that building at the time it was built. The owners of the building were just as interested at that time with keeping cost down as owners of factories are today, so putting on a pretense of higher quality and not building to squeeze the blood out of each penny is not true.
The building is just an example of the level of building tech available at that time, in that area for the money it cost to build.
@@Albet27 Glass is cheaper than walls and has been for the last 150 years. The reason why is that glass is made in a factory with fixed costs and no downtime due to weather, while walls are built on site by skilled workmen of several different trades out in the weather.
Glass is one thing, while a wall section is many different things put together by different people on a building this large - carpenters, labourers, masons, etc.
You sound like you haven't actually built anything, yet think you can hold up your end of an argument with someone who has.
@@clickbeetle2720 Google float glass, bud. It's been in production for well over 100 years. You, like the previous commenter who deleted his comments, know nothing about this.
Damn! Some lucky audiophile is going to be delighted with that new system. Stunning. 😮
You got me with playing Kraftwerk!
Compelling is an understatement. Love the "kraft manship"...🤙🏽😎
Your historical collection is fabulous and a beautiful building too.
Thanks so much for doing these videos 🥳
I think there are very few in the industry that´s got any clue what you are doing, but I love it ..... passion, music, extremely wonderful experience 😎🥳🤠
I really want one of these Idler drive decks Jonathan..... would you sell to me? .... this is the coolest thing 😍🥰😇😎
(I would never be able to afford K3 or K5 😓)
I think 99% of the turntables sold today are completely scre#$## up, we need direct drive or idler drive, belt drive never did it for me, something missing there 🤐
When do you guys start with the development of bass horns? Way much better than anything else, in my ears and soul…
We love these - Thank you for sharing!
Love it.
Thanks for sharing - what an awesome facility and part of the world.
wonderful post!...and really like your shirt/jacket😍
Nice Horns:)
Tower of full range open baffles? Not the most elegant, but it could be made so, and its just as simple and perfect as it gets, i think.
You get for each channel 3x sensitivity increase, and responce, because moving mass, more air contact area, and more dispursed comprised wafefront. Im sure you can make it with no crossover. Honestly, they should be high resistance coils in series for no tube output transformer!!!
It drives me nuts most people have not done it this way.
But its a fairly involved process making coils, i guess. thinner wire and more turns. Lol thats all there is to it, to eliminate a complex part like an output transformer in an amplifer. Jesus christ, you could even run it on 120v and a doubler diode capacitor circuit to get to 400v. Then its only a driver tube and a power tube and a few resistors and capacitors. Its so simple. It could be put onto the speaker system, instead of making a whole dang nother chassis and cabling system. Would just run 2 cords, and interconnect signal in. Or in this day and age, lossless wireless music transfer, but i think in actual execution, wireless anything is very lossy.
The 3 drivers and 2 tubes per channel can be more expensive, like emissions labs or old siemens stuff, they are spectacular creations. The baffle can be a slab of live edge wood, and the frame or leaning stand can be plated brass. The adjustment for aiming should be ultra fine, micrometer like adjustments, and dampening materials should be considered, wool or felt would be nice. But with 3 speakers per channel, the wavefront is so large you dont have to worry about perfect symmetry.
12 inch full range alnico whizzer cone speakers, diatone clones, made in china, are actually very good, I found they can make those fairly well. The pair is 700 delieverd, so 2100 in speakers makes sense, Honestly it would be best for reference system to use speakers even higher in quality but those are not tooo common these days, in very minute particular excellent development. Lots of trialing, listening, adapting and material selecting. For starters, diyers can afford 2100 in speakers, and can make a baffle and frame for say another 1000, WIth that setup, the distorition would be record low, the responce would be sharp as anything, and the overall volume would be spectacular. with low distortion, it would make for reference, or would actually work in any application like theaters, or live events. The best way is open baffle when outdoors. Its a shame how much time and money is wasted in making boxes.
-god.