Audio, hi-fi and car audio - Soundstage and depth of image

Audio Banter (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/forum.php)

- uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi) (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/uk-rec-audio-general-audio/)

- - Soundstage and depth of image (https://www.audiobanter.co.uk/uk-rec-audio-general-audio/5839-soundstage-depth-image.html)

Soundstage and depth of image

In article , Trevor Wilson
wrote:

a.. World's smallest filter/condenser - 1000µF, (50W version - 2200µF)

Weird boast to make...

Do they also include

x) World's highest value for ripple on the power lines. (And perhaps on the
output when under load.)

y) World's fastest collapse in power rails when high output currents are
required.

For some reason P.T.Barnum springs to mind... :-)

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 message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

wrote

snip

A mile of ********, from what I could see of it....

We seem to agree on this - although as someone who changed to SI, I guess
I
should say 'kilometer'... :-)

I would say you're pushing your luck in a UK ng, spelling a French unit of
distance the American way.....!! ;-)

Soundstage and depth of image

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote

**Delusion is the explanation. The idea of building something tends to
convey a feeling that the builder has constructed the finest sounding
product possible. Normal human emotion, but often has no relation to
reality.

I really love this one - simply being able to trot this ******** out
conveys to me that the writer is getting carried away by his own
prejudices.

**Nope. I deal in facts, not delusions.

Typically the first claim of the terminally deluded....

I know of *no* DIYer who isn't dubious/unsure about his own products or
who doesn't elicit opinions from others.

**Well, I'm here to tell you that I meet them all the time.

Fine. Our experiences differ...

Here's ONE
example which sticks in my mind:

I sold a properly manufactured, Zero Global NFB, full complementary preamp
to a client. The product specc'd out at around 0.05% THD (20Hz - 20kHz)
and similar levels of IMD. Frequency response is 0.5dB from DC to 150kHz.
S/N is in excess of 100dB. IOW: No serious objective flaws. Sonically, it
is enjoyed by many. The client is a technical person, who fancied himself
as a person who could make improvements. He called me and asked me to pop
over, so I could judge his latest 'improvement', in view of selling it to
the manufacturer. I sat down, ready to carefully listen. He had built a
much more sophisticated and very large power supply for his preamp. He had
managed to inject a hum level of what I judged to be around -50dB and, as
near as I could tell, he had completely screwed the soundstage, such that
it was now artificially broad and shallow. Sheesh! Just the hum was
annoying, yet he kept claiming that the thing sound great. Typical.

I've got a million of them.

Another client brought his homemade gear (along with his wife) over to
demonstrate. We sat down and listened. I hear dproblems, but decided not
to embarrass him in front of his wife. Then I played my reference
equipment (not expensive, BTW). His wife exclaimed: "That's it darling.
That's the sound I like."

I *am* aware that many DIYers spend
endless amounts of time tweaking their creations until they're happy with
them and I suspect some are *never* truly happy with them.....

**And in many cases, rightly so. I do not want to suggest that DIYers
cannot get it right. Many can and do.

OK, that's something.....

It's just that they have zero objectivity.

Another ridiculous remark - what do you mean by it? DIYers don't *measure*?
DIYers don't ask for third party opinions? DIYers don't make
comparisons....??

Do try to keep it real....

**That's just it. I DO keep it real. I deal in facts, not fantasy.

I think not. You deal in the facts as *you* see them based on your own
experiences, much like a copper spends most of his time *dealing* with
law-breakers, I suspect....

Their imaging is just part of their attraction and
probably just a function of their great speed,dynamics and
clarity-traits often attributed to SETs.

**Speed, clarity, dynamics? Attributed to SETs? Not in this universe.
SETs wash out detail and lack clarity. That is what makes them so
popular.

So popular?

**Sure. Lots of people (in the enthusiast community) have owned them.

Make your mind up - next you'll be telling us how *few* people
use them....

**Sure.

More contradiction - what is it - 'few' or 'lots'...???

But what a stupid, ****ing remark that was - I for one doubt you have
ever heard a SET amplifier.**

**Doubt all you wish. I've heard many.

Like how many roughly - I've only heard 4......????

In some cases, in the same system.
The reality is that different SET amps sound fundamentally different to
each other. They can't all be right. OTOH, they all could be wrong.

Or they could all just be *different* - you'll be saying all amps sound the
same next.....

Clarity and detail is the very reason I use SET amps and I got there by
trying just about everything else....!!

**You did not try EVERYTHING else. You just tried some stuff which was
easy/cheap for you to lay your hands on.

Sure - SS amps all the way up (?) to Krell, a few PP valve amps and the SETs
mentioned above....

Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all
the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians.

I think you're ready for a career change.....

**What? Just because I deal in the truth?

No, quite the opposite - I think you are probably suffering too much from
knowing what you *should* be measuring and *should* be hearing rather than
what you actually hear...

Don't know about you matey, but frequently by the time I've done myself a
bit of a fry-up I very often don't fancy eating it - know what I mean...???

Soundstage and depth of image

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote

**Delusion is the explanation. The idea of building something tends to
convey a feeling that the builder has constructed the finest sounding
product possible. Normal human emotion, but often has no relation to
reality.

I really love this one - simply being able to trot this ******** out
conveys to me that the writer is getting carried away by his own
prejudices.

**Nope. I deal in facts, not delusions.

Typically the first claim of the terminally deluded....

I know of *no* DIYer who isn't dubious/unsure about his own products or
who doesn't elicit opinions from others.

**Well, I'm here to tell you that I meet them all the time.

Fine. Our experiences differ...

Here's ONE
example which sticks in my mind:

I sold a properly manufactured, Zero Global NFB, full complementary
preamp to a client. The product specc'd out at around 0.05% THD (20Hz -
20kHz) and similar levels of IMD. Frequency response is 0.5dB from DC to
150kHz. S/N is in excess of 100dB. IOW: No serious objective flaws.
Sonically, it is enjoyed by many. The client is a technical person, who
fancied himself as a person who could make improvements. He called me and
asked me to pop over, so I could judge his latest 'improvement', in view
of selling it to the manufacturer. I sat down, ready to carefully listen.
He had built a much more sophisticated and very large power supply for
his preamp. He had managed to inject a hum level of what I judged to be
around -50dB and, as near as I could tell, he had completely screwed the
soundstage, such that it was now artificially broad and shallow. Sheesh!
Just the hum was annoying, yet he kept claiming that the thing sound
great. Typical.

I've got a million of them.

Another client brought his homemade gear (along with his wife) over to
demonstrate. We sat down and listened. I hear dproblems, but decided not
to embarrass him in front of his wife. Then I played my reference
equipment (not expensive, BTW). His wife exclaimed: "That's it darling.
That's the sound I like."

I *am* aware that many DIYers spend
endless amounts of time tweaking their creations until they're happy
with them and I suspect some are *never* truly happy with them.....

**And in many cases, rightly so. I do not want to suggest that DIYers
cannot get it right. Many can and do.

OK, that's something.....

It's just that they have zero objectivity.

Another ridiculous remark - what do you mean by it?

**I mean that DIYers have no ability to critically appraise their own work.
They are too invested in it.

DIYers don't *measure*?

**Some do. Most don't.

DIYers don't ask for third party opinions?

**Most do. And most of their friends are too polite to tell them the truth.

DIYers don't make
comparisons....??

**Sure they do. And regardless of what the truth actually is, they hear what
they want to hear.

Do try to keep it real....

**That's just it. I DO keep it real. I deal in facts, not fantasy.

I think not.

**I am well aware of that.

You deal in the facts as *you* see them based on your own
experiences, much like a copper spends most of his time *dealing* with
law-breakers, I suspect....

**Facts are immutable. Beliefs are something else.

Their imaging is just part of their attraction and
probably just a function of their great speed,dynamics and
clarity-traits often attributed to SETs.

**Speed, clarity, dynamics? Attributed to SETs? Not in this universe.
SETs wash out detail and lack clarity. That is what makes them so
popular.

So popular?

**Sure. Lots of people (in the enthusiast community) have owned them.

Make your mind up - next you'll be telling us how *few* people
use them....

**Sure.

More contradiction - what is it - 'few' or 'lots'...???

**Asked and answered.

But what a stupid, ****ing remark that was - I for one doubt you have
ever heard a SET amplifier.**

**Doubt all you wish. I've heard many.

Like how many roughly - I've only heard 4......????

**Roughly? 20 or so. Ranging in price from home built to AUS$150,000.00. All
sounded different to each other. I wonder if any was actually right?

In some cases, in the same system.
The reality is that different SET amps sound fundamentally different to
each other. They can't all be right. OTOH, they all could be wrong.

Or they could all just be *different* - you'll be saying all amps sound
the same next.....

**All COMPETENTLY designed amps do sound the same. Flawed amps sound
different.

Clarity and detail is the very reason I use SET amps and I got there by
trying just about everything else....!!

**You did not try EVERYTHING else. You just tried some stuff which was
easy/cheap for you to lay your hands on.

Sure - SS amps all the way up (?) to Krell, a few PP valve amps and the
SETs mentioned above....

**Krell have managed build some less than good amplifiers. Not all PP amps
are perfect either.

Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all
the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians.

I think you're ready for a career change.....

**What? Just because I deal in the truth?

No, quite the opposite - I think you are probably suffering too much from
knowing what you *should* be measuring and *should* be hearing rather than
what you actually hear...

**Projection duly noted. My approach is pretty simple. Before bothering to
consider if a product is worhty of serious consideration, it must first be
able to exceed a range of specifications which define the limits of human
audibility. For instance: I see little point in judging an amplifier which
cannot at least offer a frequency response (when coupled to a pair of
loudspeakers) that exceeds the limits of human audibility. The reason is
blindingly simple: An amplifier which offers a +/- 0.1dB, 20Hz - 20kHz
response will sound fundamentally different to one which offers (say) a
+/-3dB 20Hz - 20kHz response. Several SETs I have measured are MUCH worse
than that.

Please note that I suggest testing into real speaker loads, not resistors.
The difference is profound.

Don't know about you matey, but frequently by the time I've done myself a
bit of a fry-up I very often don't fancy eating it - know what I
mean...???

**I have a fair idea.

--
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

It's just that they have zero objectivity.

Another ridiculous remark - what do you mean by it?

**I mean that DIYers have no ability to critically appraise their own
work. They are too invested in it.

DIYers don't *measure*?

**Some do. Most don't.

DIYers don't ask for third party opinions?

**Most do. And most of their friends are too polite to tell them the
truth.

DIYers don't make
comparisons....??

**Sure they do. And regardless of what the truth actually is, they hear
what they want to hear.

You must have some pretty anal DIYers in your neck of the woods - I have a
total stranger (from a neaby Forum) coming here tomorrow to hear my
'firewood horns' and other assorted junk (I can call it hat...) - I've
already told him he might not like it and if he thinks it's crap he's to
bloody well *say so*!!

(I can drop back to *blando-blando ordinaire* in a heartbeat, but my
*leading edge* might be a bit strong for some....!! ;-)

You deal in the facts as *you* see them based on your own
experiences, much like a copper spends most of his time *dealing* with
law-breakers, I suspect....

**Facts are immutable. Beliefs are something else.

Get the finest ingredients, throw 'em in a tin, shove it in the oven and
*bingo* a super fruit cake every time, eh...???

snip stuff with too many indents

More contradiction - what is it - 'few' or 'lots'...???

**Asked and answered.

In a contradictory manner...

Like how many roughly - I've only heard 4......????

**Roughly? 20 or so. Ranging in price from home built to AUS$150,000.00.
All sounded different to each other. I wonder if any was actually right?

WTF is *right*...???

'Right' for me is what I like the sound of - nothing else.....

Or they could all just be *different* - you'll be saying all amps sound
the same next.....

**All COMPETENTLY designed amps do sound the same. Flawed amps sound
different.

Too easy.....

Sure - SS amps all the way up (?) to Krell, a few PP valve amps and the
SETs mentioned above....

**Krell have managed build some less than good amplifiers. Not all PP amps
are perfect either.

Well, who'da thunk it??

Or...

Feck me, you don't say.....

No, quite the opposite - I think you are probably suffering too much from
knowing what you *should* be measuring and *should* be hearing rather
than what you actually hear...

**Projection duly noted. My approach is pretty simple. Before bothering to
consider if a product is worhty of serious consideration, it must first be
able to exceed a range of specifications which define the limits of human
audibility. For instance: I see little point in judging an amplifier which
cannot at least offer a frequency response (when coupled to a pair of
loudspeakers) that exceeds the limits of human audibility. The reason is
blindingly simple: An amplifier which offers a +/- 0.1dB, 20Hz - 20kHz
response will sound fundamentally different to one which offers (say) a
+/-3dB 20Hz - 20kHz response. Several SETs I have measured are MUCH worse
than that.

Please note that I suggest testing into real speaker loads, not resistors.
The difference is profound.

Other than measuring voltages, the only way I can 'test' an amp is use
it....

Let's agree to disagree - I love my stuff (new and old, bought and made -
even when it's ****ing me off), you do what you think's right.....

Soundstage and depth of image

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.

If two separate power supplies are needed for 'dual mono' whatever that
is, it simply means the designer can't make a decent single one. Or more
likely is buying in poorly designed cheap ones. Or perhaps you think
something like a mixing desk used in a radio continuity where there will
be all sorts of signals incoming that you wouldn't want to break through
uses one power supply per channel? Etc.

It so limits your ability to be opened minded and trust your ears.

The 'ears' unfortunately are easily fooled by the 'brain'.

--
*Who are these kids and why are they calling me Mom?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Soundstage and depth of image

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:57:55 +0100, "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.

If two separate power supplies are needed for 'dual mono' whatever that
is, it simply means the designer can't make a decent single one. Or more
likely is buying in poorly designed cheap ones. Or perhaps you think
something like a mixing desk used in a radio continuity where there will
be all sorts of signals incoming that you wouldn't want to break through
uses one power supply per channel? Etc.

It so limits your ability to be opened minded and trust your ears.

The 'ears' unfortunately are easily fooled by the 'brain'.

I would expect signal-to-supply coupling to be somewhere around -80dB
in a decent design. If you then move over to the victim side, I would
expect a competent design to have around another 80dB of PSRR. That is
a total isolation of 160dB, which is certainly going to be swamped by
airborne stuff however good the power supplies are.

So no, there should never be a need for separate power supplies.

As for dual mono. That clearly means separate programme material in
the two amplifiers - otherwise it would be stereo. If you are
amplifying different material, presumably you are going to have them
in different rooms, so separate power supplies are pretty much a
given.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Soundstage and depth of image

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!

Soundstage and depth of image

"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:-)

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:-)

I wonder what you meant by "all the rubbish inserted...." ???

Iain