Mixer fetish?

I had a Yamaha RD400 and crapped out at about 15k miles - so many new maintenance recommendation letters from the dealer (tighten this and that in a regular basis). After it became too much of a headache, I sold it. The neighbor let me use his son's Kawasaki H2 for a summer (deadly piece of crap) while he was in boot camp. At the end of the summer I drove it down to North Carolina for him and took the greyhound home. Not a fair trade at all. He definitely got the better end of that deal from my point of view (but he still had to deal with then H2).

I hated that they sound like you're pulling a line of empty tin cans bouncing on the road and everything smelled of 2-cycle oil after each ride - not exactly "chick magnets".

I eventually bought a Suzuki GS750ES, Honda VF750F and VFR800F. Currently riding a Honda ST1300. I love the Honda V-fours.

The H2 was seriously dangerous, the fastest accelerating production bike for many years - and too many people bought them who were two inexperienced to ride them, particularly as they had a reputation for very poor handling. The 750cc Suzuki two stroke triple was a much more refined bike, and water cooled as well. In fact the guy I bought my 380 triple off had a 750 as well, he bought the 380 to ride through the winter.

As far as I'm aware the Yamaha RD series were pretty good bikes, perhaps you happened to get a poor one?, I didn't know anyone with the 400, but a friend had the RD200 which was amazing, and another later on had the RD350LC which was highly respected.

Not a two stroke, but a few years ago I delivered a washing machine to a bungalow in the small village I grew up in, I actually knew the bungalow, and previous people who lived there. Anyway, the washing machine was installed in the garage, with the pipes going through the wall in to the kitchen (rather strange?) - so we were in the garage, and I notice bike paraphernalia about so asked if he had a bike? (he was a pretty old guy). He said he used to have one, but his window cleaner kept asking to buy it, and eventually he sold it to him. It was an Italian bike, and a make I'd never heard of, but apparently VERY fast.

Next time the window cleaner came round he asked how the bike was doing, to be told that he had to sell it, he was out for a ride one day and when he looked down at the speedo he was doing 140mph, on a fairly small country road with a fair number of adjoining roads.

This is where it was:


He was on the A623 going from left to right, approaching the junction with the B6049 - the speed limit is 50mph. It doesn't help that the road rises and falls, and you're completely invisible in places.

Nigel Goodwin said:

and considerably lower revving than four stokes as well.

Click to expand...

I think you mean higher revving!

rjenkinsgb said:

I think you mean higher revving!

Click to expand...

It feels like you have to rev them more off of a standing start but each cylinder fires every revolution makes them sound like they are revving much faster than a 4-stroke at the same rpm.

Also, exhaust design for a 2-stroke favors a higher pitch than 4-stroke design.

Finally, the flywheel on a 4-stroke helps keep the engine turning for the two revolutions between power strokes (on a single cylinder) whereas the two-strokes flywheel (if there is one) can be much smaller so they can accelerate from idle to redline much faster than a corresponding 4-stroke.

Mostly, 2-strokes are stinky, inefficient, polluting, noisy at an annoying pitch. Kawasaki's Z1 (4-stroke) released shortly after the H3 - similar power - but more expensive, heavier and required more maintenance but more popular.

Getting back on topic, mixing consoles, you might be interested in the story of the EMI TG12345 Mk1 mixing console.
This is the same console used by the Beatles to record their fabled and last album, Abbey Road.
There are several YT videos describing the restoration process, but I think this one is the most technical descriptive.
A particular challenge in the restoration, or any restoration for that matter, is to refurbish it with original components. For this project it meant using British-made components through out, which was very difficult as many, if not most of these companies are long gone.
The video shows a quite complicated looking reed switch, which the video mentions that replacements were machined expressly for the restoration.
They also mention that the console used germanium transistors. In 1968-69 when this mixer was built, silicon transistors were already widely available, although expensive.

Anyway, enjoy the video.

schmitt trigger said:

Getting back on topic, mixing consoles, you might be interested in the story of the EMI TG12345 Mk1 mixing console.
This is the same console used by the Beatles to record their fabled and last album, Abbey Road.
There are several YT videos describing the restoration process, but I think this one is the most technical descriptive.
A particular challenge in the restoration, or any restoration for that matter, is to refurbish it with original components. For this project it meant using British-made components through out, which was very difficult as many, if not most of these companies are long gone.
The video shows a quite complicated looking reed switch, which the video mentions that replacements were machined expressly for the restoration.
They also mention that the console used germanium transistors. In 1968-69 when this mixer was built, silicon transistors were already widely available, although expensive.

Anyway, enjoy the video.

Click to expand...

The Mk2 version of the mixer, for which drawn out schematics are available, used the excellent BC109 - but I couldn't find schematics for the Mk1, which presumably was germanium?, mostly, if not entirely.

I thought the Mk1 was made in 1966?.

It would make more sense if it was made, or at least designed in 1966, to have conceived it with germanium transistors.

Germanium transistors required really careful biasing schemes. Compared to silicon devices, it had a gargantuan ICBO which was also temperature dependent.
But musicians just love them.

What I don’t recall is the tape recorder’s brand. I recall seeing in the mid-1980s a superb British tape recorder. Soundcraft perhaps?? Not very common on this side of the pond, which was dominated by Ampex or Otari machines.

EDIT, no it wasn’t Soundcraft. This was a decade later.

schmitt trigger said:

It would make more sense if it was made, or at least designed in 1966, to have conceived it with germanium transistors.

Germanium transistors required really careful biasing schemes. Compared to silicon devices, it had a gargantuan ICBO which was also temperature dependent.
But musicians just love them.

What I don’t recall is the tape recorder’s brand. I recall seeing in the mid-1980s a superb British tape recorder. Soundcraft perhaps?? Not very common on this side of the pond, which was dominated by Ampex or Otari machines.

EDIT, no it wasn’t Soundcraft. This was a decade later.

Click to expand...

The classic British recorder manufacturer was Ferrograph