|
|
Soundstage and depth of image
In article , Iain Churches
wrote: "Trevor Wilson" wrote Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians. Trevor. Not being in the record business yourself, you probably have no idea of the competition within the selection process which enables one to take even the first step in this business. Having worked for major labels for a great many years, and been involved in selecting candidates for training, I can tell you that only about 1% of those shortlisted ever get to the second interview level. There are no vacancies in the recording business:-) I am sure the above is correct. There is probably a similar situation in the 'meeja' where loads of people are eager to be actors, producers, newsreaders, etc. However the snag is that the "competition" does not necessarily guarantee the quality of the results thus produced. Witness, for example, the recent discussions regarding absurd levels of automated level compression on some rock/pop CDs, etc. Thus the action of "competition" only selects on the basis which drives it, which *may* alas, have little to do with quality, or with any real understanding of relevant engineering, etc. Likewise, the demands made upon session musicians who play on the records we make, are considerable. Can you play 64 bars from a written part at tempo "vivace" with simultaneous transposition up or down a minor third, prima vista without a single mistake. Makes your profession of audio retailing look pretty tame, doesn't it? and also probably explains the "would have been" flavour to your post:-) The above skills would clearly be very valuable for many musicians. However I wonder how many superb musicians would fail in a "competition" on such a basis - yet have made recordings of, say, Jazz or Blues, which have become highly regarded and have endured? Be careful what you wish for - you may get it. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Iain Churches" wrote in message .. . "Trevor Wilson" wrote Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians. Trevor. Not being in the record business yourself, you probably have no idea of the competition within the selection process which enables one to take even the first step in this business. **Correct. I call it (mostly) from and end user perspective and partly from the perspective of one who has dealt with recording studios on a technical basis (I regularly did work for CBS Australia, back in the 1970s and 1980s). I also did some work for EMI Australia in the 1970s. Anecdote: Sometime around 1980, I supplied some new loudspeakers to the tape duplicating section of CBS. After using them for a few months, I received a call, asking if I could supply an amplifier to drive them. I dutifully arrived with an amplifier whcih was appropriate for the speakers being used. After a couple of weeks on trial, I recieved a 'phone call from the head engineer, which went something like this: Engineer: "Thanks for the loan of the amp. It drives the speakers really well, but we have a problem. When we use it, the flaws in the tapes become more readily obvious. Do you have another amp which will mask those flaws?" And this was form the QUALITY CONTROL section. Sheesh! Most people in the recoding industry do not care about quality. Few ever have. (Please note: I said FEW ever have. Not none.) I'll relate my experiences with EMI to you sometime. They were worse. Much worse. Having worked for major labels for a great many years, and been involved in selecting candidates for training, I can tell you that only about 1% of those shortlisted ever get to the second interview level. There are no vacancies in the recording business:-) **That would be because 99.9% of all applicants have no talent for their chosen profession. Do the math. Likewise, the demands made upon session musicians who play on the records we make, are considerable. Can you play 64 bars from a written part at tempo "vivace" with simultaneous transposition up or down a minor third, prima vista without a single mistake. **Non-sequitur. I do my job competently. I expect others to do likewise. Particularly when it comes to preserving great art. Makes your profession of audio retailing look pretty tame, **Audio retailing? You need to do a lot more research, before you cram your other foot into your mouth. My CV is significantly longer than that. My CURRENT range of jobs is longer than that. Your personal attack is, however, duly noted. You may care to note that I have not attacked you and will refrain from doing so. doesn't it? and also probably explains the "would have been" flavour to your post:-) I wonder what you meant by "all the rubbish inserted...." ??? **Go listen to a contemporary recording sometime. Most are appalling badly engineered. Many classical recordings are treated similarly. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message oups.com Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article .com, wrote: While a single Power Humpty can run the entire unit, you can use a second Power Humpty for true dual mono operation. Presumably only if each is driven off its own mains generator? . Blah Blah Blah with you guys and your techno wank. It so limits your ability to be opened minded and trust your ears.I might be romantic but you guys are tragic.It stunts you. No, it keeps us grounded in reality. One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. Name him. 5 will get you 10 that he's a well-known charlatan. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. That's charlatan with a C. He put extra effort into power supply and regulation on this thing. Given how he no doubt effectively marks up parts and labor, he's got plenty of incentive to add as many surplus features as his technically naive market will bear. It is 100 watts RMS and capable of driving low impedence speakers. So is a Behringer A500, and with power to spare. He built it to drive some very demanding electrostats and because many of his respected customers were raving about these things.He has since designed and built a KT88 amp with a damping factor of 200 so no longer needed the chip amp. Respected customers? Name them! Name him. 5 will get you 10 that they are not what you'd call technically lettered. This guy used to slag off op amps all the time-I believe because they are so often badly used in CD players and phono amps. More likely, the audio sucker market shifted and he followed the dollars. The chip amp is not as good as his valve amps-[better than his hybrids though]but that does not mean that it is not still better than the vast majority of SS amps. Whatver that means. It exposes their lack of dynamics,speed and clarity and their dirty and compressed sound. Spare us all - a pace and timing bigot! Just my opinion-many others don't hear it this way-but many others do. The Rotel amps mentioned by TW don't come even close .He has some of them too. No doubt, it's part of his schtick - "I've got all these Rotel amps, but the ones I build for ten times the price per watt sound better". For people who can't relate to the transistor amp sound the chip amps are an alternative. Ironic given taht they are transistor amps, pure and simple. They have a clearly different,fresher,faster and more open sound. Yeah, sure. They are not perfect[they can sound a bit cold and hard when driven hard],but to dismiss them out of some sort of technical elitism rather than just listening to them is pointless. Who said anything about dismissing them? How about we build some good ones using orthodox technology that works, and laugh all the way to the bank? You guys will probably never agree because you hear differently. Yeah, its that blind listening test thing. Something about not seeing which amp you're listening to during the evaluation. But others who are frustrated by hearing it another way might.[Peolpe who like SETs for example]. I just don't have much affinity for integer number percentages of nonlinear distortion and frequency response curves that are highly dependent on the speaker's impedance curves. When I replied to the initial post this is who I was trying to inform-not you mob of crusty old tech worshiping skeptics. Its not a matter of us worshipping tech and you not. Its a matter of us knowing tech, and you not. With the chip amp kits costing less than many interconnect cables, Ooops folks, we've got one of those! why should people not be encouraged to try them? Its got to beat spending a small fortune on a SET which might not sound better. IME its hard to find a good-sounding SET. I am sick of this subject. That's why you can't write much about it. Not! I will have to find some other wipping boy subject. How about begging, borrowing or buying your first clue about orthodox audio technology? How about battery powered portable CD players sounding better than home ones?-I haven't heard that one for a while. Yes you did - you just raised that old canard up again. Then again I have a battery powered chip preamp....... Well so do I - its a Boostaroo! The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. JT |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message s.com... So i am not the only delusional one. **No one ever suggested you were. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message .. . : : wrote in message : s.com... : So i am not the only delusional one. : : **No one ever suggested you were. : : : -- : Trevor Wilson : www.rageaudio.com.au : : Please note here Trevor I do not want to get involved in your argument with JT nor class myself as delusional but I thought I would just make a few comments on this subject. As you know I have a ME850/24 combo driving some large 2 Ohm Apogee speakers and yes I do believe what I have is very good indeed. JT has kindly loaned me one of these Chip Amps for a comparison and we did some testing while he was still at my place. Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on negates any unbiased test :-( So if we forget about the power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand why people would like them. BTW I am yet to hear JT's good one in his system so I will reserve final judgement ;-) I would just like to point out that it is always difficult to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-) Cheers TT |
Soundstage and depth of image
"TT" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message .. . : : wrote in message : s.com... : So i am not the only delusional one. : : **No one ever suggested you were. : : : -- : Trevor Wilson : www.rageaudio.com.au : : Please note here Trevor I do not want to get involved in your argument with JT nor class myself as delusional but I thought I would just make a few comments on this subject. As you know I have a ME850/24 combo driving some large 2 Ohm Apogee speakers and yes I do believe what I have is very good indeed. JT has kindly loaned me one of these Chip Amps for a comparison and we did some testing while he was still at my place. Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on negates any unbiased test :-( So if we forget about the power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand why people would like them. BTW I am yet to hear JT's good one in his system so I will reserve final judgement ;-) **Take your ME stuff over and pin his ears back. He has clearly never actually listened to one. I would just like to point out that it is always difficult to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-) **I've heard many power OP amps, many times. They're cheap, convenient, hard to destroy and reasonable performers. Those points have never been in contention. It is for those reasons that they are used in almost all cheap audio systems. They are far from simple (despite what the technically incompetent continually say). They are also incapable of equalling an ME850 (as you already know). And make no mistake: The midrange area is the easiest area for any amp to perform well. It is the frequency extremes that cost money. The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote: The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching? -- *He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Soundstage and depth of image
Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Trevor Wilson wrote: The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching? -- *He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. The hum has been attributed to a PCB fault or damage.It would probably be easy to fix but the builder has much better things to do with his time than hunt around for the cause.I will have a tech look into it later. The other chip amp [Sonic Art] is very quiet. It would be hard to imagine a less suited speaker to a chip amp than TTs Equinox-with its many drivers,crossover complexity and low impedence.Very many substantial SS amps would struggle on these-as the smaller M.E.s did.That they still sound pretty good with the buggered one is an indication of the potential of these things on less demanding speakers.On such speakers their bass and treble is at least up to very good SS amps of similar power,but as TT says,it is their midrange which is special.I would add to that their image depth and precision,their speed and their dynamics[both macro and micro]. Trevor I cannot agree that the midrange is most easy to get right.If anything bass is most easy to get right.Any decent P.A. amp can do reasonable bass.Even digital ones. JT |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article m,
wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article , TT
wrote: Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on negates any unbiased test :-( Not so. It should be perfectly possible for *both* amps to be powered, and driven with the same input signals, symultaneously. You can also use dummy loads on the amp you are not listening to. Thus making largely 'common mode' such defects. Although personally, I would not choose to use an amp whose physical hum was audible in use. So if it did that, the behaviour would tend to make me choose something else. So if we forget about the power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand why people would like them. I would just like to point out that it is always difficult to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-) What you can do, though is: 1) Do a form of comparison which is designed to exclude any tendency for judgements of 'difference' to be based on factors other than the actual results emerging from the speakers. From what you say, I think this would be quite possible in the case you describe. 2) Examine the units and understand the implications of the engineering involved. So, for example, if you were to use a 'gainclone' with tiny reservoir caps, you could check to see if the output was being accompanied by levels of ripple intermod whose details varyied dynamically with the music. If you found this was present at high levels, it might then explain some of the percieved 'differences'. (Assuming you were also doing (1) so could have some confidence that they were not extraneous.) Similarly, if the units had markedly difference frequency response in use, that might explain any reliably-established 'differences'. What may be difficult is knowing what someone might 'like' as their tastes or circumstances may differ from your own. However it is far from clear if differences *are* always as audible as people assert, or arise for the reasons they assume. Sainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote: The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. I would not be concerned if it were only audible in an otherwise silent room when you put your ear close to the amp. But in my view it should certainly be inaudible in such a room when you are sitting in a normal listening location. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message ups.com... Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Trevor Wilson wrote: The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching? -- *He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. The hum has been attributed to a PCB fault or damage.It would probably be easy to fix but the builder has much better things to do with his time than hunt around for the cause.I will have a tech look into it later. The other chip amp [Sonic Art] is very quiet. It would be hard to imagine a less suited speaker to a chip amp than TTs Equinox-with its many drivers,crossover complexity and low impedence.Very many substantial SS amps would struggle on these-as the smaller M.E.s did.That they still sound pretty good with the buggered one is an indication of the potential of these things on less demanding speakers.On such speakers their bass and treble is at least up to very good SS amps of similar power,but as TT says,it is their midrange which is special.I would add to that their image depth and precision,their speed and their dynamics[both macro and micro]. **I suggest you read TT's words again. He was impressed with the power OP amp (except for the hum issues) on a value for money basis (something I have never denied), but felt is was not as good as his ME850. If you can manage to read something else into those words, then you are engaging in some kind of supernatural practices. Of course, TT can confirm or deny your assertion. Trevor I cannot agree that the midrange is most easy to get right.If anything bass is most easy to get right.Any decent P.A. amp can do reasonable bass.Even digital ones. **Points: * Your power OP amps did NOT get the bass right (see TT's words). * I have consistently stated that switching amps SHOULD be able to reproduce lower frequency information better and more efficiently than any other amplifier type. It is high frequencies (and low impedances) where switching amps run into problems. * We are not discussing "reasonable bass". We are discussing high fidelity. IOW: Accurate (20Hz) bass. * An amplifier which cannot reproduce 20Hz - 20kHz with absolute fidelity is not high fidelity. It is something else. * Midrange IS the easiest area to get right. Bass frequencies are dominated by power supply and output device constraints (along with VI limiting issues), whilst HF is dominated by output device speed, VI limiting and stability/Zobel network constraints. With your exceptional technical skills, perhaps you'd care to explain why you think I am wrong. I'll wait. * With small (ie: Limited bandwidth) speakers, a smaller amp can often sound better than a large amp. Small bass drivers often perform better with a small, bandwidth restricted amp. Just like a Gainclone, in fact. Such an effect can easily be compensated for, by using a filter before a large power amp. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article .com,
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. Your point being that he is "famous" in the places where he is known? :-) Regardless of which, my main point what that being "well known in concentric circles" does not necessarily tell us anything about the actual quality of the product. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
Jim Lesurf wrote: In article .com, wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. Your point being that he is "famous" in the places where he is known? :-) Regardless of which, my main point what that being "well known in concentric circles" does not necessarily tell us anything about the actual quality of the product. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, I agree.It would be famous only in a cultish sort of way. Probably the only famous audio designer would be Dr Bose-and largely through spending lots of money promoting his own products. |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. **Mr Maloney appears to eschew quoting even basic specifications for his equipment. What is he hiding? You seem to be under the impression that a bunch of people raving about a product, automatically confer some kind of status of the product and it's designer. It doesn't work that way. If it did, Bose would be the best audio products on the planet. After all, Bose avoid quoting specs too. Mr Maloney certainly builds attractive products, which are based on obsolete technology and are priced at a level which makes strong men weep. If he can make money out of it, then good luck to him. For me, I demand some basic specs from any manufacturer, before I take him seriously. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article .com, wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. Your point being that he is "famous" in the places where he is known? :-) Regardless of which, my main point what that being "well known in concentric circles" does not necessarily tell us anything about the actual quality of the product. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, I agree.It would be famous only in a cultish sort of way. Probably the only famous audio designer would be Dr Bose-and largely through spending lots of money promoting his own products. **You need to get out (much) more. Here's a short list of reasonably famous designers (which people have actually heard of), who have runs on the board: John Curl Jim Bongiorno Ken Ishiwata Jeff Rowland Saul Marantz Dick Johnson Tim de Paravicini Peter Walker Peter Stein Jim Lesurf These are people who not only are well known and highly regarded in the area of amplifier design, but that actually properly specify (or specified) the products they designed. There are many others, of course. I've chatted to four of the above designers and find them to be modest, educated and careful about design aspects, so that objective performance is maximised. All care about specifications. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
"TT" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote in message .. . : : wrote in message : s.com... : So i am not the only delusional one. : : **No one ever suggested you were. : : : -- : Trevor Wilson : www.rageaudio.com.au : : Please note here Trevor I do not want to get involved in your argument with JT nor class myself as delusional but I thought I would just make a few comments on this subject. As you know I have a ME850/24 combo driving some large 2 Ohm Apogee speakers and yes I do believe what I have is very good indeed. JT has kindly loaned me one of these Chip Amps for a comparison and we did some testing while he was still at my place. Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on negates any unbiased test :-( So if we forget about the power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand why people would like them. BTW I am yet to hear JT's good one in his system so I will reserve final judgement ;-) I would just like to point out that it is always difficult to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-) Cheers TT Apologies guys, I haven't been following this thread closely but just out of curiosity is the amplifier (JT's) referred to by TT a Robertson Audio Forty Ten? Cheers, Alan |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Alan Rutlidge" wrote in message ... : : : Apologies guys, I haven't been following this thread closely but just out of : curiosity is the amplifier (JT's) referred to by TT a Robertson Audio Forty : Ten? : : Cheers, : Alan : It's the heavily modified one I sent you the pics of ;-) JT will be able to give you more details on it. Cheers TT |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message ups.com... : : : : wrote in message : ups.com... : : Dave Plowman (News) wrote: : In article , : Trevor Wilson wrote: : The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part : of : the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent. : : That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching? : : -- : *He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead. : : Dave Plowman London SW : To e-mail, change noise into sound. : : The hum has been attributed to a PCB fault or damage.It would probably : be easy to fix but the builder has much better things to do with his : time than hunt around for the cause.I will have a tech look into it : later. : : The other chip amp [Sonic Art] is very quiet. : : It would be hard to imagine a less suited speaker to a chip amp than : TTs Equinox-with its many drivers,crossover complexity and low : impedence.Very many substantial SS amps would struggle on these-as the : smaller M.E.s did.That they still sound pretty good with the buggered : one is an indication of the potential of these things on less demanding : speakers.On such speakers their bass and treble is at least up to very : good SS amps of similar power,but as TT says,it is their midrange which : is special.I would add to that their image depth and precision,their : speed and their dynamics[both macro and micro]. : : **I suggest you read TT's words again. He was impressed with the power : OP : amp (except for the hum issues) on a value for money basis (something : I : have never denied), but felt is was not as good as his ME850. If you : can : manage to read something else into those words, then you are engaging : in : some kind of supernatural practices. Of course, TT can confirm or deny : : your assertion. : : : : Trevor I cannot agree that the midrange is most easy to get right.If : anything bass is most easy to get right.Any decent P.A. amp can do : reasonable bass.Even digital ones. : : **Points: : : * Your power OP amps did NOT get the bass right (see TT's words). : * I have consistently stated that switching amps SHOULD be able to : reproduce : lower frequency information better and more efficiently than any other : amplifier type. It is high frequencies (and low impedances) where : switching : amps run into problems. : * We are not discussing "reasonable bass". We are discussing high : fidelity. IOW: Accurate (20Hz) bass. : * An amplifier which cannot reproduce 20Hz - 20kHz with absolute : fidelity : is not high fidelity. It is something else. : * Midrange IS the easiest area to get right. Bass frequencies are : dominated by power supply and output device constraints (along with VI : : limiting issues), whilst HF is dominated by output device speed, VI : limiting and stability/Zobel network constraints. With your : exceptional : technical skills, perhaps you'd care to explain why you think I am : wrong. : I'll wait. : * With small (ie: Limited bandwidth) speakers, a smaller amp can often : : sound better than a large amp. Small bass drivers often perform better : : with a small, bandwidth restricted amp. Just like a Gainclone, in : fact. : Such an effect can easily be compensated for, by using a filter before : a : large power amp. : : : -- : Trevor Wilson : www.rageaudio.com.au : As I said Trevor, I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here at all. I have merely passed on some casual observations about an amp I have tried in relation to a known product that you like and respect. My reason for comment was to try and show there is some middle ground here. The amp is probably not as bad as you keep saying BUT at the same time it is not "the good one" that JT is commenting on that I have not yet heard. So IMHO after some limited testing it is not too bad but certainly not as good as the ME. Again it makes it very difficult to evaluate because it has a noisy power supply so straight away I have a negative opinion. One of my pet hates is 50Hz hum :-( This weekend I plan on having another listening session before returning it to JT. Cheers TT |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote: **You need to get out (much) more. Here's a short list of reasonably famous designers (which people have actually heard of), who have runs on the board: John Curl Jim Bongiorno Ken Ishiwata Jeff Rowland Saul Marantz Dick Johnson Tim de Paravicini Peter Walker Peter Stein Jim Lesurf I'd like to make clear my alarm at being included in the above list! Although I appreciate that the critierion may be, "people on this newsgroup have probably heard of them." :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article , TT
wrote: [snip] Again it makes it very difficult to evaluate because it has a noisy power supply so straight away I have a negative opinion. One of my pet hates is 50Hz hum :-( Mine also. Indeed. I regard it as unacceptable that domestic audio equipment should produce *any* 'mechanical noises' which can be heard in normal use. This is one of the reasons I have a distinct aversion of units that have things like cooling fans or hard discs. They may be 'quiet', but that isn't necesarily the same as 'silent' or 'inaudible'. Even some CD players/drives in my experience make audible noises produced by the disc rotation. More than one of the items I have bought, I had to dissassemble to fit various acoustic damping materials, or to alter the physical constuction, simply to stop the item making noises that were a distraction in use. Given that this generally only takes a bit of thought and/or 50p-worth of materials I find it depressing that manufacturers don't all do this as routine. FWIW It also baffles me that magazines often review products which can make such noises, yet make no reference to it whatsoever. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
"TT" wrote in message ... As I said Trevor, I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here at all. I have merely passed on some casual observations about an amp I have tried in relation to a known product that you like and respect. My reason for comment was to try and show there is some middle ground here. The amp is probably not as bad as you keep saying BUT at the same time it is not "the good one" that JT is commenting on that I have not yet heard. **"As bad as I keep saying"? Here are my exact words: --- They're cheap (power OP amps), reasonably well performing, easy to use and hard to destroy. --- Though it seems JT has managed to bugger up his effort. So IMHO after some limited testing it is not too bad but certainly not as good as the ME. Again it makes it very difficult to evaluate because it has a noisy power supply so straight away I have a negative opinion. One of my pet hates is 50Hz hum :-( This weekend I plan on having another listening session before returning it to JT. **Power OP amps are real easy to get right. That is what makes them so popular with home builders. Whack one on a PCB, pack a half dozen support components, a heat sink and a power supply. Presto! One functioning amplifier. What once took a home constructor a couple of weeks (with the attendant high probability of buggering things up), now takes an evening or two. They're bloody cheap, if you get it wrong and very comprehensively protected to boot. You have discovered the dirty secret of the hi fi biz - Connect a competent amplifier to a quality pair of speakers and the whole thing sounds pretty good. This is not news to anyone. Power OP amps are reasonable and, if built properly, competent. High end, they ain't. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... "TT" wrote in message ... As I said Trevor, I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here at all. I have merely passed on some casual observations about an amp I have tried in relation to a known product that you like and respect. My reason for comment was to try and show there is some middle ground here. The amp is probably not as bad as you keep saying BUT at the same time it is not "the good one" that JT is commenting on that I have not yet heard. **"As bad as I keep saying"? Here are my exact words: --- They're cheap (power OP amps), reasonably well performing, easy to use and hard to destroy. --- Though it seems JT has managed to bugger up his effort. So IMHO after some limited testing it is not too bad but certainly not as good as the ME. Again it makes it very difficult to evaluate because it has a noisy power supply so straight away I have a negative opinion. One of my pet hates is 50Hz hum :-( This weekend I plan on having another listening session before returning it to JT. **Power OP amps are real easy to get right. That is what makes them so popular with home builders. Whack one on a PCB, pack a half dozen support components, a heat sink and a power supply. Presto! One functioning amplifier. What once took a home constructor a couple of weeks (with the attendant high probability of buggering things up), now takes an evening or two. They're bloody cheap, if you get it wrong and very comprehensively protected to boot. You have discovered the dirty secret of the hi fi biz - Connect a competent amplifier to a quality pair of speakers and the whole thing sounds pretty good. This is not news to anyone. Power OP amps are reasonable and, if built properly, competent. High end, they ain't. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au Ahhhhhh................. Now I see a little clearer ;-) You have explained the topology of the amp very well for someone that has not seen it. Cheers TT |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... In article , Trevor Wilson wrote: **You need to get out (much) more. Here's a short list of reasonably famous designers (which people have actually heard of), who have runs on the board: John Curl Jim Bongiorno Ken Ishiwata Jeff Rowland Saul Marantz Dick Johnson Tim de Paravicini Peter Walker Peter Stein Jim Lesurf I'd like to make clear my alarm at being included in the above list! Although I appreciate that the critierion may be, "people on this newsgroup have probably heard of them." :-) **LOL! I couldn't leave you out Jim. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. **Mr Maloney appears to eschew quoting even basic specifications for his equipment. What is he hiding? You seem to be under the impression that a bunch of people raving about a product, automatically confer some kind of status of the product and it's designer. It doesn't work that way. If it did, Bose would be the best audio products on the planet. After all, Bose avoid quoting specs too. Mr Maloney certainly builds attractive products, which are based on obsolete technology and are priced at a level which makes strong men weep. If he can make money out of it, then good luck to him. For me, I demand some basic specs from any manufacturer, before I take him seriously. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata.He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good.There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible.His fine tuning may even result in products that don't measure as well [like some of Ken Ishawatas modifications] .This is pure speculation of course. Most of his clients couldn't care less about how well they measure.I have never,however heard from anywhere that they don't,and I know that he takes great care in running each of his products for an extended period on his test bench before sending them off to his customers. Obsolete technology? If anything is obsolete technology it is the monster transistor amps you seem to love.These are the real dinasaurs of audio. JT So valves are obsolete technology? |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message oups.com... Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. **Mr Maloney appears to eschew quoting even basic specifications for his equipment. What is he hiding? You seem to be under the impression that a bunch of people raving about a product, automatically confer some kind of status of the product and it's designer. It doesn't work that way. If it did, Bose would be the best audio products on the planet. After all, Bose avoid quoting specs too. Mr Maloney certainly builds attractive products, which are based on obsolete technology and are priced at a level which makes strong men weep. If he can make money out of it, then good luck to him. For me, I demand some basic specs from any manufacturer, before I take him seriously. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. His fine tuning may even result in products that don't measure as well [like some of Ken Ishawatas modifications] .This is pure speculation of course. **Indeed. You seem to engage in quite a bit of that. Most of his clients couldn't care less about how well they measure. **Irrelevant. I have never,however heard from anywhere that they don't,and I know that he takes great care in running each of his products for an extended period on his test bench before sending them off to his customers. **And yet there are no useful specs listed on his site for any of his equipment. Obsolete technology? **Yup. If anything is obsolete technology it is the monster transistor amps you seem to love. **Projection. I don't "love" objects. These are the real dinasaurs of audio. **Uh-huh. Tell us more. JT So valves are obsolete technology? **Of course. There is nothing (in audio) that can be done with valves, that cannot be achieved with transistors. With the possible exception of the gradual wearing out of valves from the instant they are switched on. That part is quite difficult to duplicate. Even the microphonic effects of valves can be duplicated, though I have no idea why anyone would want to do so. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message ... : In article , TT : wrote: : : [snip] : : Again it makes it very difficult to evaluate because it has a noisy : power supply so straight away I have a negative opinion. One of my pet : hates is 50Hz hum :-( : : Mine also. Indeed. I regard it as unacceptable that domestic audio : equipment should produce *any* 'mechanical noises' which can be heard in : normal use. This is one of the reasons I have a distinct aversion of units : that have things like cooling fans or hard discs. They may be 'quiet', but : that isn't necesarily the same as 'silent' or 'inaudible'. Even some CD : players/drives in my experience make audible noises produced by the disc : rotation. : : More than one of the items I have bought, I had to dissassemble to fit : various acoustic damping materials, or to alter the physical constuction, : simply to stop the item making noises that were a distraction in use. Given : that this generally only takes a bit of thought and/or 50p-worth of : materials I find it depressing that manufacturers don't all do this as : routine. : : FWIW It also baffles me that magazines often review products which can make : such noises, yet make no reference to it whatsoever. : : Slainte, : : Jim : I have had a similar argument with Cambridge Audio and their 640H music server. For a supposedly Audiophile product they put in the cheapest, nastiest, noisiest CPU cooling fan they could find that drove me nuts! What still amazes me is that we have made this giant leap into transparent optical/HD media that eradicates any medium noise only to build machines that put their own noise back into it! Why go from "noisy" LP to "quiet" CD only to have the machine generate all the hum/hiss/wish that you have just eradicated with the technology. One step forward and two back IMHO :-( Some of these insidious noises only become really apparent when you have lived with the unit for a short while in your domestic environment. So now when someone says to me "have you hear a chip amp?" I can now say "Hum a few bars and I'll let you know." :-)) Whinge mode OFF Cheers TT |
Soundstage and depth of image
"TT" wrote in message ... "Alan Rutlidge" wrote in message ... : : : Apologies guys, I haven't been following this thread closely but just out of : curiosity is the amplifier (JT's) referred to by TT a Robertson Audio Forty : Ten? : : Cheers, : Alan : It's the heavily modified one I sent you the pics of ;-) JT will be able to give you more details on it. Cheers TT Thanks TT. I suspected this is the one you were referring to. Not wishing to get up anyone's nose but the quality of the internal construction of this amplifier leaves a lot to be desired. It kind of reminded me of my first efforts with a soldering iron as a school aged teenager, having never at the time been showed how to solder properly. I do find it a bit difficult to accept this is actually a commercial product, albeit a modified one. Point to point wiring on tag strips (with the exception of the two small PCBs with the ICs etc) would be considered more the exception rather than the rule in a solid state design. Just re-examining the photos of the internals I think the hum problem may be traced back to what looks like IMHO an obvious dry joint on the -ve terminal on one of the ELNA can type smoothing capacitors. Also (but just guessing here as photos are quite often hard to get "the full picture" from) the earthing structure might be a bit "messy". Cheers, Alan |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. **Mr Maloney appears to eschew quoting even basic specifications for his equipment. What is he hiding? You seem to be under the impression that a bunch of people raving about a product, automatically confer some kind of status of the product and it's designer. It doesn't work that way. If it did, Bose would be the best audio products on the planet. After all, Bose avoid quoting specs too. Mr Maloney certainly builds attractive products, which are based on obsolete technology and are priced at a level which makes strong men weep. If he can make money out of it, then good luck to him. For me, I demand some basic specs from any manufacturer, before I take him seriously. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. His fine tuning may even result in products that don't measure as well [like some of Ken Ishawatas modifications] .This is pure speculation of course. **Indeed. You seem to engage in quite a bit of that. Most of his clients couldn't care less about how well they measure. **Irrelevant. I have never,however heard from anywhere that they don't,and I know that he takes great care in running each of his products for an extended period on his test bench before sending them off to his customers. **And yet there are no useful specs listed on his site for any of his equipment. Obsolete technology? **Yup. If anything is obsolete technology it is the monster transistor amps you seem to love. **Projection. I don't "love" objects. These are the real dinasaurs of audio. **Uh-huh. Tell us more. JT So valves are obsolete technology? **Of course. There is nothing (in audio) that can be done with valves, that cannot be achieved with transistors. With the possible exception of the gradual wearing out of valves from the instant they are switched on. ............... Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Gee Trevor, I've yet to figure out how some manufacturer's of SS equipment manage to design that "timebomb" into their gear which magically goes off just after the warranty expires. :-( I have two multi-channel power amps which just after the 5 year warranty ran out developed exactly the same fault (within a week of each other) in exactly the same channel (left-rear). The in-built protection fortunately activates protecting the speakers from damage as the output gets stuck hard to the -ve supply rail. No components are faulty but exactly the same PCB tracks develop dry joints which produced the fault. I just wish I knew more people with the same model amp to compare notes to see just how widespread the same fault may be. Cheers, Alan |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Alan Rutlidge" wrote in message ... Gee Trevor, I've yet to figure out how some manufacturer's of SS equipment manage to design that "timebomb" into their gear which magically goes off just after the warranty expires. :-( **Don't get me started. Back when I worked for a major importer, as service manager, I received a highly confidential report into the reliability of the manufacturer's products. They ranged from 0.5% to 100%, over the 3 year warranty period. This was in the 1970s and the least reliable products (by a considerable margin) were the quadraphonic (4 channel) ones. Though one of my favourites (because, when it worked, it sounded bloody marvellous) was a two channel power amp. Each one sold in Australia had to be repaired at least 10 times during warranty. Owing to the complexity of the amp, each reapir job took around 12 hours. From cradle to grave, the 300 amps manufactured (world-wide) reportedly cost the company US$3 million. Recently, I received similar information regrading the reliability of another major importer's products from the service manager. It seems some products are exhibiting a failure rate of a around 60%. And this is not a fly-by-night, made in China manufacturer. It is one of the most respected names in the business. It seems little has changed. I have two multi-channel power amps which just after the 5 year warranty ran out developed exactly the same fault (within a week of each other) in exactly the same channel (left-rear). The in-built protection fortunately activates protecting the speakers from damage as the output gets stuck hard to the -ve supply rail. No components are faulty but exactly the same PCB tracks develop dry joints which produced the fault. I just wish I knew more people with the same model amp to compare notes to see just how widespread the same fault may be. **Which brand and model? -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Jim Lesurf wrote: In article m, wrote: One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly successful and regarded amplifier designer maker. He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids. The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but just out of curiosity and for a specific task. if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of the products. I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient speakers] So i am not the only delusional one. It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using 'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Jim, Do a Supratek search in Audiogon.There is plenty of info in their dicussion forums. Or search reviews in 6 Moons. Or visit the Supratek site. **Mr Maloney appears to eschew quoting even basic specifications for his equipment. What is he hiding? You seem to be under the impression that a bunch of people raving about a product, automatically confer some kind of status of the product and it's designer. It doesn't work that way. If it did, Bose would be the best audio products on the planet. After all, Bose avoid quoting specs too. Mr Maloney certainly builds attractive products, which are based on obsolete technology and are priced at a level which makes strong men weep. If he can make money out of it, then good luck to him. For me, I demand some basic specs from any manufacturer, before I take him seriously. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. That is an unfair if not libellous implication He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? Very few audio product websites publish measurements.If they do it is probably because they are trying to justify a product which sounds terrible or has not been well reviewed. There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. Practicaly every transistor amplifier I have heard and a great percentage of mainstream modern speakers,Measure well,sound crap[Mission for example-no wonder they went bust] His fine tuning may even result in products that don't measure as well [like some of Ken Ishawatas modifications] .This is pure speculation of course. **Indeed. You seem to engage in quite a bit of that. Well I do seem to remember reading some reviews on the Marantz KISE CD players that didn't measure as well as the standard versions[less even frequency response,higher distortion etc] Most of his clients couldn't care less about how well they measure. **Irrelevant. INot at all have never,however heard from anywhere that they don't,and I know that he takes great care in running each of his products for an extended period on his test bench before sending them off to his customers. **And yet there are no useful specs listed on his site for any of his equipment. Obsolete technology? **Yup. If anything is obsolete technology it is the monster transistor amps you seem to love. **Projection. I don't "love" objects. These are the real dinasaurs of audio. **Uh-huh. Tell us more. The PWM/digital types are already making them redundant with their greater efficiency,lower production cost and at least as good sound. JT So valves are obsolete technology? **Of course. There is nothing (in audio) that can be done with valves, that cannot be achieved with transistors. With the possible exception of the gradual wearing out of valves from the instant they are switched on. That part is quite difficult to duplicate. Even the microphonic effects of valves can be duplicated, though I have no idea why anyone would want to do so. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article .com,
wrote: Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... [snip poorly quoted message] Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. That is an unfair if not libellous implication He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? Very few audio product websites publish measurements.If they do it is probably because they are trying to justify a product which sounds terrible or has not been well reviewed. Curious that you assume the above assertion *isn't* "libellous", but that Trevor's comments were... :-) ....although due to the poor format of your reply, it is quite hard to distinguish his comments from yours. There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. Practicaly every transistor amplifier I have heard and a great percentage of mainstream modern speakers,Measure well,sound crap[Mission for example-no wonder they went bust] Strange that my own experience is so different to yours. Rather than make a sweeping assertion, and only mention one defunct brand, why not name some *specific* amplifiers which we may also have a chance of being able to hear, or may have used? Trevor didn't ask you for a sweeping assertion and a brand name. He invited you to list the products you were referring to. I also wonder what causes you to think an amp does "sound crap". Your judgement might not be the same as mine, or of others. For example, if you like a 'gainclone' type of design with low-value reservour caps then that *might* be because you like the results of high levels of ripple-signal intermodulation, varying dynamically with the music. But I doubt that I or Trevor would prefer this. I might have wanted to comment on the rest of the posting. However I gave up on trying to work out which bits were by JT and which by Trevor. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article ,
Alan Rutlidge wrote: I have two multi-channel power amps which just after the 5 year warranty ran out developed exactly the same fault (within a week of each other) in exactly the same channel (left-rear). The in-built protection fortunately activates protecting the speakers from damage as the output gets stuck hard to the -ve supply rail. No components are faulty but exactly the same PCB tracks develop dry joints which produced the fault. I just wish I knew more people with the same model amp to compare notes to see just how widespread the same fault may be. To me, the above sounds like either they had a batch of PCBs where some of the solder pads were poorly made, or a problem with the automated soldering, or that part of the board was getting hot/stressed in use for some reason. FWIW It is not unknown for 'design reasons' for specific faults to be more common on a unit than others. One of the advantages of having a unit in long-term production is that faults that only show up after a few years in use can be dealt with by a mod or a change of component. Alas, manufacturers often feel obliged to bring out a 'new model' - if only to get mentioned in the magazines via a round of 'reviews'. Thus they may not allow the time to sort such problems, so commit a new set in the new design. FWIW I tend to be dubious of this practice, but I can quite see why people do it since otherwise they risk being 'forgotten' in a world where people only buy mags for a few months when they want to buy something. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message oups.com... Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. That is an unfair if not libellous implication **Libellous? In what sense? Be precise please. I can tell you that Ken Ishiwata is a VERY talented designer. That is not libellous in any sense of the word. He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? Very few audio product websites publish measurements. **Wanna bet? How many would you like me to list, before I tire of listing them? Here's a few (including some valve amp manufacturers): http://www.audioresearch.com/reference210.htm http://www.conradjohnson.com/It_just...-products.html http://www.bryston.ca/BrystonSite05/...cs.html#sstamp http://www.manleylabs.com/containerp...Y2K.html#specs http://www.classeaudio.com/delta/specs/ca2100.htm http://www.marklevinson.com/products...asp?prod=no33h Etc. If they do it is probably because they are trying to justify a product which sounds terrible or has not been well reviewed. **Utter, banal nonsense. A manufacturer who does not publish a comprehensive set of specs is either lazy, or has something to hide. There is no middle ground here. There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. Practicaly every transistor amplifier I have heard and a great percentage of mainstream modern speakers,Measure well,sound crap[Mission for example-no wonder they went bust] **I'll ask again: Name them. His fine tuning may even result in products that don't measure as well [like some of Ken Ishawatas modifications] .This is pure speculation of course. **Indeed. You seem to engage in quite a bit of that. Well I do seem to remember reading some reviews on the Marantz KISE CD players that didn't measure as well as the standard versions[less even frequency response,higher distortion etc] **Cite the review. Most of his clients couldn't care less about how well they measure. **Irrelevant. INot at all have never,however heard from anywhere that they don't,and I know that he takes great care in running each of his products for an extended period on his test bench before sending them off to his customers. **And yet there are no useful specs listed on his site for any of his equipment. Obsolete technology? **Yup. If anything is obsolete technology it is the monster transistor amps you seem to love. **Projection. I don't "love" objects. These are the real dinasaurs of audio. **Uh-huh. Tell us more. The PWM/digital types are already making them redundant with their greater efficiency,lower production cost and at least as good sound. **Not yet. Switching amps cannot cope with low impedances and 20kHz response figures. When switching frequencies hit 5MHz, they will be more interesting. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
Jim Lesurf wrote: In article .com, wrote: Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... [snip poorly quoted message] Mick Maloney is probably more like Ken Ishawata. **I very much doubt that. I've had some long conversations with Ken Ishiwata. He REALLY knows his stuff. That is an unfair if not libellous implication He takes competent designs which he develops in conjunction with New York audio engineer Kevin Covi and fine tunes them so they not only measure well but also sound good. **Then why does he not publish any measurements of his equipment? Very few audio product websites publish measurements.If they do it is probably because they are trying to justify a product which sounds terrible or has not been well reviewed. Curious that you assume the above assertion *isn't* "libellous", but that Trevor's comments were... :-) ...although due to the poor format of your reply, it is quite hard to distinguish his comments from yours. There are plenty of products that measure well but sound terrible. **Name them. Practicaly every transistor amplifier I have heard and a great percentage of mainstream modern speakers,Measure well,sound crap[Mission for example-no wonder they went bust] Strange that my own experience is so different to yours. Rather than make a sweeping assertion, and only mention one defunct brand, why not name some *specific* amplifiers which we may also have a chance of being able to hear, or may have used? Trevor didn't ask you for a sweeping assertion and a brand name. He invited you to list the products you were referring to. I also wonder what causes you to think an amp does "sound crap". Your judgement might not be the same as mine, or of others. For example, if you like a 'gainclone' type of design with low-value reservour caps then that *might* be because you like the results of high levels of ripple-signal intermodulation, varying dynamically with the music. But I doubt that I or Trevor would prefer this. I might have wanted to comment on the rest of the posting. However I gave up on trying to work out which bits were by JT and which by Trevor. Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html Yes , My apologies.I often confuse myself too. Blame TW for messing with my head again.There is only so much **** stirring a bloke can handle /dish out before he starts to lose the plot. Enough already. God Bless Transdniestria ! |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message ... "Alan Rutlidge" wrote in message ... Gee Trevor, I've yet to figure out how some manufacturer's of SS equipment manage to design that "timebomb" into their gear which magically goes off just after the warranty expires. :-( **Don't get me started. Back when I worked for a major importer, as service manager, I received a highly confidential report into the reliability of the manufacturer's products. They ranged from 0.5% to 100%, over the 3 year warranty period. This was in the 1970s and the least reliable products (by a considerable margin) were the quadraphonic (4 channel) ones. Though one of my favourites (because, when it worked, it sounded bloody marvellous) was a two channel power amp. Each one sold in Australia had to be repaired at least 10 times during warranty. Owing to the complexity of the amp, each reapir job took around 12 hours. From cradle to grave, the 300 amps manufactured (world-wide) reportedly cost the company US$3 million. Recently, I received similar information regrading the reliability of another major importer's products from the service manager. It seems some products are exhibiting a failure rate of a around 60%. And this is not a fly-by-night, made in China manufacturer. It is one of the most respected names in the business. It seems little has changed. I have two multi-channel power amps which just after the 5 year warranty ran out developed exactly the same fault (within a week of each other) in exactly the same channel (left-rear). The in-built protection fortunately activates protecting the speakers from damage as the output gets stuck hard to the -ve supply rail. No components are faulty but exactly the same PCB tracks develop dry joints which produced the fault. I just wish I knew more people with the same model amp to compare notes to see just how widespread the same fault may be. **Which brand and model? Sony TA-N9000ES 5 channel power amplifier (introduced late 1998 - early 1999??) and last of the ES separates before they started rolling out the new integrated digital HT receiver crap. The fault is common on both units to the left rear channel. There is a Class A cascade section that uses 3 surface mount small signal bipolar transistors. In both cases none of the semis were faulty but dry joints / hairline fractures in the very narrow tracks in the underside of the PCB associated with this part of the circuit were identified as the cause of the fault. The fault causes the output of the LR channel to go full voltage to the -ve supply rail, which causes the protection circuitry to operate isolating the load from the amplifier's output. The visible flashing of the power LED indicates to the user a serious fault has been detected. Cheers, Alan -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 10:58:20 +0800, "Alan Rutlidge"
wrote: I have two multi-channel power amps which just after the 5 year warranty ran out developed exactly the same fault (within a week of each other) in exactly the same channel (left-rear). The in-built protection fortunately activates protecting the speakers from damage as the output gets stuck hard to the -ve supply rail. No components are faulty but exactly the same PCB tracks develop dry joints which produced the fault. I just wish I knew more people with the same model amp to compare notes to see just how widespread the same fault may be. Well, perhaps if you divulged the make and model you MIGHT get to know more people with the same amp! WHY are people so coy about the very information that would make a post worthwhile? :-) |
Soundstage and depth of image
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 13:34:17 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"
wrote: **Which brand and model? And, of course, the same question to you? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:22 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