![]() |
Digital volume control question....
A week or two ago I bought a little cheapo ss amplifier from Argos for
fun/summer/curiosity/all day long radio, MP3s &c. and wuz so taken with it I bought a couple more (similarly cheap) components from the same range to go with it: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/outbreak.JPG (OK, I admit it - I was driven by the 3-way, multi-purpose remote control!! :-) Anyway, the clarity I'm getting from this little bugger from any number of different sources is quite exceptional and I'm wondering if the 'digital volume control' has anything to do with it? I know the speakers (firewood horns - Pinkies) are 'on song' now and will be contributing mostly to the sound quality and I am convinced that normal (carbon wiper) volume pots do the sound no favours whatsoever, but is there any reason the 'digital volume' (much like a computer soundcard, I guess) is likely to be helping in a significant way? (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) |
Digital volume control question....
On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:28:48 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: A week or two ago I bought a little cheapo ss amplifier from Argos for fun/summer/curiosity/all day long radio, MP3s &c. and wuz so taken with it I bought a couple more (similarly cheap) components from the same range to go with it: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/outbreak.JPG (OK, I admit it - I was driven by the 3-way, multi-purpose remote control!! :-) Anyway, the clarity I'm getting from this little bugger from any number of different sources is quite exceptional and I'm wondering if the 'digital volume control' has anything to do with it? I know the speakers (firewood horns - Pinkies) are 'on song' now and will be contributing mostly to the sound quality and I am convinced that normal (carbon wiper) volume pots do the sound no favours whatsoever, but is there any reason the 'digital volume' (much like a computer soundcard, I guess) is likely to be helping in a significant way? (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) No - in fact there is more chance that a poorly implemented digital control will damage the sound. But the real reason why your amp has a digital volume control is the usual one - cost. Pots cost money, they need mechanical fixings to support them and people have to bolt them in and wire them up. That is all bad news for a high-volume manufacturer. People are still resistant to digital volume controls in much of the market, though. I have a couple of amps with motorized volume pots. The reason why it all sounds so clear is that it is a normal SS amp and it isn't broken. These days it really doesn't have a lot of choice in the matter - you need to exert special efforts to make a bad amp these days, particularly if, as I suspect, this one uses chips for the PA stage. d -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Digital volume control question....
"Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:28:48 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: I know the speakers (firewood horns - Pinkies) are 'on song' now and will be contributing mostly to the sound quality and I am convinced that normal (carbon wiper) volume pots do the sound no favours whatsoever, but is there any reason the 'digital volume' (much like a computer soundcard, I guess) is likely to be helping in a significant way? (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) No - in fact there is more chance that a poorly implemented digital control will damage the sound. But the real reason why your amp has a digital volume control is the usual one - cost. Sure, the amp only cost 60 quid brand new (with warranty)!! Pots cost money, they need mechanical fixings to support them and people have to bolt them in and wire them up. Yep. That is all bad news for a high-volume manufacturer. People are still resistant to digital volume controls in much of the market, though. Hmm.... I have a couple of amps with motorized volume pots. Nothing 'motorized' here - the *Control* knob (multifunctional) doesn't turn when the zapper's up and down buttons are being used and it rotates endlessly when being turned by hand.... (Bit like the manual focussing on my digital camera - OK on the amp, but pretty irritating on the camera!!) The reason why it all sounds so clear is that it is a normal SS amp and it isn't broken. These days it really doesn't have a lot of choice in the matter - you need to exert special efforts to make a bad amp these days, Yes, my suspicion also and why I bought the amp in the first place, to check it out. (See below...) particularly if, as I suspect, this one uses chips for the PA stage. PA stage?? (Preamplification?) I believe it's pretty hard to buy a bad *anything* much these days. I can understand stuff costing a lot of money if it uses a lot of expensive material or is hand-built (in a one-off kinda way) but I generally think the VFM factor is pretty high for what these things cost! As to the the volume control, I would consider that anything that took a carbon pot out of the occasion would be a good thing? (I don't know about 'poorly implemented' - why should it be poor? Is this one area where it would be particularly difficult to do the thing well?) My exploration into all this has been a staggering success AFAIAC - I have proved (to myself, if no other) that the *speakers* drive the whole 'hifi' thing *bigtime*! I would/will put this sound I'm getting off a cheap POS amp against anything I've heard to date!! In fact, I'll go as far as to say I don't much care about sources and amplification, the speakers can (and do) make or break it all!! I shudder to think how much money people are throwing at the game, trying to get a pair of iffy speakers to sound good. I swapped the Pinkies for a pair of very respectable JM-Labs the other day and the sound (from the exact same kit) slumped like punctured tyre!! I've got turntables/tuners/CDPs here that cost nowt and they all sound superb on the firewood horns, irrrespective of the amplifiers used!! Its revised my views completely, my advice to anyone looking for good sound on the cheap would/will be 'build a pair of speakers and then chuck any old kit at them' - I reckon you could get a superb tuner/CDP system going for less than 200 quid!! If me little mic weren't bust I'd post a track or two!! (Off to check out the mic anyway..... :-) |
Digital volume control question....
Keith G wrote:
A week or two ago I bought a little cheapo ss amplifier from Argos for fun/summer/curiosity/all day long radio, MP3s &c. and wuz so taken with it I bought a couple more (similarly cheap) components from the same range to go with it: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/outbreak.JPG (OK, I admit it - I was driven by the 3-way, multi-purpose remote control!! :-) Anyway, the clarity I'm getting from this little bugger from any number of different sources is quite exceptional and I'm wondering if the 'digital volume control' has anything to do with it? I know the speakers (firewood horns - Pinkies) are 'on song' now and will be contributing mostly to the sound quality and I am convinced that normal (carbon wiper) volume pots do the sound no favours whatsoever, but is there any reason the 'digital volume' (much like a computer soundcard, I guess) is likely to be helping in a significant way? (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) As far as I know there are two sorts of "digital" volume control. One is a digitally controlled analogue attenuator, that changes its attenuation according to the numeric code it is given. This can be linked to a physical rotating control, driven from up-down counters etc. The second sort is a DSP function that multiplies the digital audio signal by varying co-efficients and outputs a digital signal who's values are an attenuated (or can be amplified) version of the input. I would imagine that the volume control of your amplifier is the former as it takes in and gives out analogue. The latter would require A-D and D-A conversions. Your Marantz CD player with the variable output could be of either sort but I suspect more the latter, as changing the digits before the D-A conversion would mean that the variable output would work on both the digital and analogue outputs simultaneously. As Don Pearce mentioned, the provision of a "digital" volume control is often done for reasons of cost. Digital volume controls track left and right channels virtually perfectly (comfortably within 0.1dB) from full output to extremely quiet, and don't generate any significant noise when changing levels. Normal carbon pots can be relatively quite noisy, and even conductive plastic pots will find it difficult to track both channels to better than 2dB at high attenuations. Carbon pots can be as much as 6dB out at low levels. This will move the stereo image around as you change volume settings. An electronic attenuator chip is a lot cheaper than a conductive plastic pot, and the actual mechanical control can be a cheap device, as all one is sensing is position. As to audio quality, a conductive plastic pot will have zero effect on audio quality. It is virtually pure resistance, and that doesn't have non-linearities or generate noise (other than Johnson noise, which is not terribly relevant.) A digital attenuator will have a finite level before overloading, and will generate some noise and distortion. However, that can be so low that it is essentially swamped by the inherent noise and distortion of the rest of the amplifier circuit. The only disadvantage of a "digital" volume control I can think of is that volume changes can only be made in discrete steps, typically 1dB at low volumes, perhaps 2 or even 3dB at high volumes. S. |
Digital volume control question....
On Fri, 19 May 2006 13:33:54 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: "Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:28:48 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: I know the speakers (firewood horns - Pinkies) are 'on song' now and will be contributing mostly to the sound quality and I am convinced that normal (carbon wiper) volume pots do the sound no favours whatsoever, but is there any reason the 'digital volume' (much like a computer soundcard, I guess) is likely to be helping in a significant way? (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) No - in fact there is more chance that a poorly implemented digital control will damage the sound. But the real reason why your amp has a digital volume control is the usual one - cost. Sure, the amp only cost 60 quid brand new (with warranty)!! Pots cost money, they need mechanical fixings to support them and people have to bolt them in and wire them up. Yep. That is all bad news for a high-volume manufacturer. People are still resistant to digital volume controls in much of the market, though. Hmm.... I have a couple of amps with motorized volume pots. Nothing 'motorized' here - the *Control* knob (multifunctional) doesn't turn when the zapper's up and down buttons are being used and it rotates endlessly when being turned by hand.... (Bit like the manual focussing on my digital camera - OK on the amp, but pretty irritating on the camera!!) The reason why it all sounds so clear is that it is a normal SS amp and it isn't broken. These days it really doesn't have a lot of choice in the matter - you need to exert special efforts to make a bad amp these days, Yes, my suspicion also and why I bought the amp in the first place, to check it out. (See below...) particularly if, as I suspect, this one uses chips for the PA stage. PA stage?? (Preamplification?) I believe it's pretty hard to buy a bad *anything* much these days. I can understand stuff costing a lot of money if it uses a lot of expensive material or is hand-built (in a one-off kinda way) but I generally think the VFM factor is pretty high for what these things cost! As to the the volume control, I would consider that anything that took a carbon pot out of the occasion would be a good thing? (I don't know about 'poorly implemented' - why should it be poor? Is this one area where it would be particularly difficult to do the thing well?) My exploration into all this has been a staggering success AFAIAC - I have proved (to myself, if no other) that the *speakers* drive the whole 'hifi' thing *bigtime*! I would/will put this sound I'm getting off a cheap POS amp against anything I've heard to date!! In fact, I'll go as far as to say I don't much care about sources and amplification, the speakers can (and do) make or break it all!! I shudder to think how much money people are throwing at the game, trying to get a pair of iffy speakers to sound good. I swapped the Pinkies for a pair of very respectable JM-Labs the other day and the sound (from the exact same kit) slumped like punctured tyre!! I've got turntables/tuners/CDPs here that cost nowt and they all sound superb on the firewood horns, irrrespective of the amplifiers used!! Its revised my views completely, my advice to anyone looking for good sound on the cheap would/will be 'build a pair of speakers and then chuck any old kit at them' - I reckon you could get a superb tuner/CDP system going for less than 200 quid!! If me little mic weren't bust I'd post a track or two!! (Off to check out the mic anyway..... :-) OK - we can stop calling you Grasshopper now; you've graduated. Oh, and PA is power amplifier. d -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Digital volume control question....
"Serge Auckland" wrote (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) As far as I know there are two sorts of "digital" volume control. One is a digitally controlled analogue attenuator, that changes its attenuation according to the numeric code it is given. This can be linked to a physical rotating control, driven from up-down counters etc. The second sort is a DSP function that multiplies the digital audio signal by varying co-efficients and outputs a digital signal who's values are an attenuated (or can be amplified) version of the input. I would imagine that the volume control of your amplifier is the former as it takes in and gives out analogue. The latter would require A-D and D-A conversions. OK. Makes sense. Your Marantz CD player with the variable output could be of either sort but I suspect more the latter, as changing the digits before the D-A conversion would mean that the variable output would work on both the digital and analogue outputs simultaneously. And again. As Don Pearce mentioned, the provision of a "digital" volume control is often done for reasons of cost. Digital volume controls track left and right channels virtually perfectly (comfortably within 0.1dB) from full output to extremely quiet, and don't generate any significant noise when changing levels. Normal carbon pots can be relatively quite noisy, and even conductive plastic pots will find it difficult to track both channels to better than 2dB at high attenuations. Interesting. Carbon pots can be as much as 6dB out at low levels. Even more interesting (but not surprising)..... This will move the stereo image around as you change volume settings. An electronic attenuator chip is a lot cheaper than a conductive plastic pot, and the actual mechanical control can be a cheap device, as all one is sensing is position. As to audio quality, a conductive plastic pot will have zero effect on audio quality. It is virtually pure resistance, and that doesn't have non-linearities or generate noise (other than Johnson noise, which is not terribly relevant.) Oh I don't know - I would have thought a noisy Johnson could be a bit embarrassing at times!! ;-) A digital attenuator will have a finite level before overloading, and will generate some noise and distortion. However, that can be so low that it is essentially swamped by the inherent noise and distortion of the rest of the amplifier circuit. The only disadvantage of a "digital" volume control I can think of is that volume changes can only be made in discrete steps, typically 1dB at low volumes, perhaps 2 or even 3dB at high volumes. -1.25 dB steps across the range on this amp it appears.... Excellent answer Serge - thanks. Makes me think there's even less of a good reason for manufacturers to avoid them if, as Don says, they are 'properly implemented...??? I would have thought a standalone 'digital attenuator' (with remote?) would be a good thing for some valve amp owners - I wonder if such a thing is available?? |
Digital volume control question....
"Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 May 2006 13:33:54 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: Its revised my views completely, my advice to anyone looking for good sound on the cheap would/will be 'build a pair of speakers and then chuck any old kit at them' - I reckon you could get a superb tuner/CDP system going for less than 200 quid!! OK - we can stop calling you Grasshopper now; you've graduated. (Ooh! Does this mean you've got ping-pong balls for eyes? :-) Anyway, I'm not sure I have 'graduated' (I suspect you are referring to the perennial valve vs, ss argument) - I've recommended cheap (eBay/secondhand) amps to people for ages. I've long suspected there wasn't much to choose between ss amps in a given price range and still think they all sound pretty boring/dull/grey/dreary/barren/bleak on 'normal' speakers whereas, by contrast, valve amps can be tweaked across a fairly broad range to *tailor* a particular (more pleasing) sound. But that's not the issue, what is a revelation to me is just how much the speakers are dictating the final result from a 'hifi' system - I now believe a ****e pair of speakers (includes Famous Names) can fatally cripple just about *any* source or amplifier!! I'm not thumping any particular tub here - I just think it's a pity that people are unloading a *lot* of money to get something satisfying from a pair of speakers that ain't *ever* going to deliver the goods when the solution (OK, not for everybody, possibly) is so damn cheap! If I wuz 10 (OK - 20 or 30....) years younger I would be seriously thinking of producing a VFM horn speaker on a commercial basis!! Two things, I think, have steered the modern trends - the inexplicable* need for unnecessary, loud, pistonic bass in (paradoxically) a small 'user/wife friendly' enclosure! Consequently amplifiers have to be capable of outputting three figures of totally unnecessary and expensive watts (in the average UK room) to get 'em to work at all and that brings a raft of other considerations into the equation which are simply not of much consequence when driving sensitive speakers with low-power amps. (Distortion, power supply issues etc.) Interesting that there's nothing particularly small about 'high end' speakers, innit? *Actually, not that inexplicable, given the nature of much modern *tribal* music....!! |
Digital volume control question....
Keith G wrote:
"Serge Auckland" wrote (If it is, I wonder why more manufacturers don't use them?) As far as I know there are two sorts of "digital" volume control. One is a digitally controlled analogue attenuator, that changes its attenuation according to the numeric code it is given. This can be linked to a physical rotating control, driven from up-down counters etc. The second sort is a DSP function that multiplies the digital audio signal by varying co-efficients and outputs a digital signal who's values are an attenuated (or can be amplified) version of the input. I would imagine that the volume control of your amplifier is the former as it takes in and gives out analogue. The latter would require A-D and D-A conversions. OK. Makes sense. Your Marantz CD player with the variable output could be of either sort but I suspect more the latter, as changing the digits before the D-A conversion would mean that the variable output would work on both the digital and analogue outputs simultaneously. And again. As Don Pearce mentioned, the provision of a "digital" volume control is often done for reasons of cost. Digital volume controls track left and right channels virtually perfectly (comfortably within 0.1dB) from full output to extremely quiet, and don't generate any significant noise when changing levels. Normal carbon pots can be relatively quite noisy, and even conductive plastic pots will find it difficult to track both channels to better than 2dB at high attenuations. Interesting. Carbon pots can be as much as 6dB out at low levels. Even more interesting (but not surprising)..... This will move the stereo image around as you change volume settings. An electronic attenuator chip is a lot cheaper than a conductive plastic pot, and the actual mechanical control can be a cheap device, as all one is sensing is position. As to audio quality, a conductive plastic pot will have zero effect on audio quality. It is virtually pure resistance, and that doesn't have non-linearities or generate noise (other than Johnson noise, which is not terribly relevant.) Oh I don't know - I would have thought a noisy Johnson could be a bit embarrassing at times!! ;-) A digital attenuator will have a finite level before overloading, and will generate some noise and distortion. However, that can be so low that it is essentially swamped by the inherent noise and distortion of the rest of the amplifier circuit. The only disadvantage of a "digital" volume control I can think of is that volume changes can only be made in discrete steps, typically 1dB at low volumes, perhaps 2 or even 3dB at high volumes. -1.25 dB steps across the range on this amp it appears.... Excellent answer Serge - thanks. Makes me think there's even less of a good reason for manufacturers to avoid them if, as Don says, they are 'properly implemented...??? I would have thought a standalone 'digital attenuator' (with remote?) would be a good thing for some valve amp owners - I wonder if such a thing is available?? I would have thought that as soon as the word "digital" is mentioned many valve amp owners will run a mile..... There are a number of passive volume controllers available albeit at ludicrous prices for what is basically a good quality pot in a tin box; and not forgetting the multi-tapped transformer controller which will have all the benefits and cons of a digital controller, but again at vastly increased cost and price. S. |
Digital volume control question....
On Fri, 19 May 2006 16:01:35 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: "Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 May 2006 13:33:54 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: Its revised my views completely, my advice to anyone looking for good sound on the cheap would/will be 'build a pair of speakers and then chuck any old kit at them' - I reckon you could get a superb tuner/CDP system going for less than 200 quid!! OK - we can stop calling you Grasshopper now; you've graduated. (Ooh! Does this mean you've got ping-pong balls for eyes? :-) I did have last weekend when I was headbutted in the nuts by a two-year-old. Anyway, I'm not sure I have 'graduated' (I suspect you are referring to the perennial valve vs, ss argument) - I've recommended cheap (eBay/secondhand) amps to people for ages. I've long suspected there wasn't much to choose between ss amps in a given price range and still think they all sound pretty boring/dull/grey/dreary/barren/bleak on 'normal' speakers whereas, by contrast, valve amps can be tweaked across a fairly broad range to *tailor* a particular (more pleasing) sound. But that's not the issue, what is a revelation to me is just how much the speakers are dictating the final result from a 'hifi' system - I now believe a ****e pair of speakers (includes Famous Names) can fatally cripple just about *any* source or amplifier!! No, not referring to valves vs SS - that is just preference. More the fact that there is nothing more to be had from SS by spending more money. The plateau starts *really* low. I'm not thumping any particular tub here - I just think it's a pity that people are unloading a *lot* of money to get something satisfying from a pair of speakers that ain't *ever* going to deliver the goods when the solution (OK, not for everybody, possibly) is so damn cheap! If I wuz 10 (OK - 20 or 30....) years younger I would be seriously thinking of producing a VFM horn speaker on a commercial basis!! Two things, I think, have steered the modern trends - the inexplicable* need for unnecessary, loud, pistonic bass in (paradoxically) a small 'user/wife friendly' enclosure! Consequently amplifiers have to be capable of outputting three figures of totally unnecessary and expensive watts (in the average UK room) to get 'em to work at all and that brings a raft of other considerations into the equation which are simply not of much consequence when driving sensitive speakers with low-power amps. (Distortion, power supply issues etc.) Expensive watts? No, those watts are really, really cheap, especially for subwoofers that use switching supplies and power amps. Interesting that there's nothing particularly small about 'high end' speakers, innit? Some friends of mine have Willson Maxx speakers. They weigh about half a ton and sound equally good when bending the walls or barely murmuring. They also stand about five feet high. *Actually, not that inexplicable, given the nature of much modern *tribal* music....!! Truth. d -- Pearce Consulting http://www.pearce.uk.com |
Digital volume control question....
Keith G wrote:
My exploration into all this has been a staggering success AFAIAC - I have proved (to myself, if no other) that the *speakers* drive the whole 'hifi' thing *bigtime*! I would/will put this sound I'm getting off a cheap POS amp against anything I've heard to date!! In fact, I'll go as far as to say I don't much care about sources and amplification, the speakers can (and do) make or break it all!! I shudder to think how much money people are throwing at the game, trying to get a pair of iffy speakers to sound good. I swapped the Pinkies for a pair of very respectable JM-Labs the other day and the sound (from the exact same kit) slumped like punctured tyre!! I've got turntables/tuners/CDPs here that cost nowt and they all sound superb on the firewood horns, irrrespective of the amplifiers used!! Its revised my views completely, my advice to anyone looking for good sound on the cheap would/will be 'build a pair of speakers and then chuck any old kit at them' - I reckon you could get a superb tuner/CDP system going for less than 200 quid!! If me little mic weren't bust I'd post a track or two!! (Off to check out the mic anyway..... :-) This reminds of the ludicrous situation that was common in the mid eighties when Linn in particular suggested a Linn-Ittok-Asak combination for use with a little Nytech or NAIM amp and Linn Kan 'speakers. The results were truly horrible entirely due to the appalling 'speakers. I really felt for people who had wasted their money in that way but what could a layman do when every mag recommended such folly. When I was in retail at the time I tried to fight against it, putting 'speakers first, then decent amplification and a CD player, but went bust for my pains. Ah well..... S. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk