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?

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread? *

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


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.
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.He put extra effort into power supply and regulation on this
thing.It is 100 watts RMS and capable of driving low impedence
speakers.
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.
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.
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.It exposes their lack of dynamics,speed and clarity
and their dirty and compressed sound.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.

For people who can't relate to the transistor amp sound the chip amps
are an alternative.They have a clearly different,fresher,faster and
more open sound.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.
You guys will probably never agree because you hear differently.But
others who are frustrated by hearing it another way might.[Peolpe who
like SETs for example].
When I replied to the initial post this is who I was trying to
inform-not you mob of crusty old tech worshiping skeptics.
With the chip amp kits costing less than many interconnect cables,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.

I am sick of this subject.I will have to find some other wipping boy
subject.How about battery powered portable CD players sounding better
than home ones?-I haven't heard that one for a while.Then again I have
a battery powered chip preamp.......

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.

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

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!

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

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

"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

"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

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.

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