|
|
Soundstage and depth of image
Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I
purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... |
Soundstage and depth of image
mb66 wrote: Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... This is probably just a matter of room acoustics. I have only one place in my house which gives really precise 3D imaging and that is where the speakers are in front of a large bay window with heavy curtains behind. The modern trend to starkly furnished rooms with hard floors rather than plush carpet and soft furnishings does not help. Try to get your speakers out from the walls and away from corners,and try to avoid a wall immediately behind your listening position. Also a good preamp is essentual for good imaging.Most preamps fail in this regard,although even some of the old NADs -like a 1240 are capable of this.If voices sound very wide or wander around then that is a sign of a preamp defficiency. Amps that use a lot of negative feedback also tend not to image well.The Audionotes have low or zero negative feedback. Another consideration is trying a Gainclone type chip amp.These seem to have amazingly 3D imaging. JT |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article .com,
wrote: Also a good preamp is essentual for good imaging.Most preamps fail in this regard,although even some of the old NADs -like a 1240 are capable of this.If voices sound very wide or wander around then that is a sign of a preamp defficiency. That sounds like phase problems or crosstalk. Are you really saying decent commercial designs do this? -- *When I'm not in my right mind, my left mind gets pretty crowded * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Soundstage and depth of image
"mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... No, feedback (external, global) is the last thng you need - what you almost certainly heard there was probably a 'SET' (single ended triode) amp. Depth and pinpoint imaging are what SETs do - in spades. They will work with any capable speaker, but factor in fullrange driver speakers (without crossovers) and you move up to *holographic* imaging. The downside is SETs are usually (but not always) low-powered and you need very sensitive speakers to get a big sound - neither is plentiful or cheap, unless you buy Chinese or build your own.... (I won't mention a decent vinyl rig with a quality MC cart and valve phono stage, to round it all off....!! ;-) |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message oups.com... mb66 wrote: Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... This is probably just a matter of room acoustics. I have only one place in my house which gives really precise 3D imaging and that is where the speakers are in front of a large bay window with heavy curtains behind. The modern trend to starkly furnished rooms with hard floors rather than plush carpet and soft furnishings does not help. Try to get your speakers out from the walls and away from corners,and try to avoid a wall immediately behind your listening position. Also a good preamp is essentual for good imaging.Most preamps fail in this regard,although even some of the old NADs -like a 1240 are capable of this.If voices sound very wide or wander around then that is a sign of a preamp defficiency. Amps that use a lot of negative feedback also tend not to image well.The Audionotes have low or zero negative feedback. Another consideration is trying a Gainclone type chip amp.These seem to have amazingly 3D imaging. **Only to the permanently brain-damaged. The Gainclone is a cheap, crappy power OP amp. The same product can be purchased for peanuts in any department store. Just look for the cheapest all in one stereo you can find. Whilst Gainclones are OK, they're hardly what one could call decent audio amplifiers. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
"mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... **Apart from room acoustics (which was previously mentioned), the next things which need to be carefully considered a * Speaker quality. A speaker which has been designed to reduce 'diffraction effects' (rounded corners, etc) will affect image depth. * A valve preamp stage, due to it's microphonics, will add excessive and artificial depth to all recordings. Listen carefully and you will probably find that it also has a bloated and artificial width as well. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Soundstage and depth of image
|
Soundstage and depth of image
Thanks Trevor, you are not to the first to mention artificial image
depth or the fact that there would potentially be a trade off in other areas but I suspect you are correct. In my current setup it seems that all the players are seated on a widish park bench playing beautifully, but I continue to search for an improvement. Room is 6m x 5m so I am trying some bigger speakers soon, see if that helps a bit. Thanks to you all for the feedback and comments. Trevor Wilson wrote: "mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... **Apart from room acoustics (which was previously mentioned), the next things which need to be carefully considered a * Speaker quality. A speaker which has been designed to reduce 'diffraction effects' (rounded corners, etc) will affect image depth. * A valve preamp stage, due to it's microphonics, will add excessive and artificial depth to all recordings. Listen carefully and you will probably find that it also has a bloated and artificial width as well. -- 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: "mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... **Apart from room acoustics (which was previously mentioned), the next things which need to be carefully considered a * Speaker quality. A speaker which has been designed to reduce 'diffraction effects' (rounded corners, etc) will affect image depth. * A valve preamp stage, due to it's microphonics, will add excessive and artificial depth to all recordings. Listen carefully and you will probably find that it also has a bloated and artificial width as well. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Trevor, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. JT |
Soundstage and depth of image
one further point that has not yet been raised is the angle between the loudspeakers at the position of the listener. For stereo recorded with crossed figure-of-eight microphones this angle should be 90 degrees. I don't know whether present day recordings have instruments placed in the same way, but for classical recodings that is still the convention I believe. I agree that the room acoustic is the most likely to interfer with the stereo stage if the room is not acustucally 'dead' enough. Robert |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article .com,
wrote: Amps that use a lot of negative feedback also tend not to image well. Afraid the above strikes me as a sweeping generalisation that fails to agree with my experience. The Audionotes have low or zero negative feedback. Another consideration is trying a Gainclone type chip amp.These seem to have amazingly 3D imaging. Well, systems that suffer from microphony might alter the perceived imaging as they would tend to add some 'reverb'. Having little or no feedback might exacerbate this tendency, but it has little to do with feedback per se. If the concern is for improved imaging, then I would suggest directing attention to the choice of speakers, their placement in the room, the listening position, and the room acoustics. Also on the choice of source material. If I understood the OP correctly his comment were based on just listening to one item. If so, the comments may relate more to that than to the system used. You'd need to listen to a variety of material to assess this. 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 , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote: In article .com, wrote: Also a good preamp is essentual for good imaging.Most preamps fail in this regard,although even some of the old NADs -like a 1240 are capable of this.If voices sound very wide or wander around then that is a sign of a preamp defficiency. That sounds like phase problems or crosstalk. Are you really saying decent commercial designs do this? Despite having tried various preamps over the years, I've never encountered one that performs as 'JT' describes. Unless he means that the channel tracking on the volume pot is poor. But my impression is that this isn't what he means. I've certainly encountered such effects due to things like the speakers or the room acoustics, though. One of the reasons I've ended up preferring Electrostatics... :-) 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
|
Soundstage and depth of image
"mb66" wrote in message ups.com... Thanks Trevor, you are not to the first to mention artificial image depth or the fact that there would potentially be a trade off in other areas but I suspect you are correct. In my current setup it seems that all the players are seated on a widish park bench playing beautifully, but I continue to search for an improvement. Room is 6m x 5m so I am trying some bigger speakers soon, see if that helps a bit. Thanks to you all for the feedback and comments. OK you've had a variety of responses which is all well and good, but it seems to me you are letting the dogma/denial boys put you off what you once heard for yourself - that, against all the odds, some kit will image better than other stuff. In the same room, on the same source, I can flick to and fro between two amp/speaker pairings switching *imaging and depth* off and on like a bathroom light! Make the effort to hear some of the suggestions yourself (SET/Gainclone amps, FR or 1st Order crossover only speakers) or be prepared to wander the planet for another few years! You asked: "Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above?" I have (I told you), I even have a pair of speakers on this computer: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/soundstage.JPG that will pinpoint an image right behind the monitor, even sitting at the keyboard! (Has been heard by a few posters here...) Forget all this crap about 'artificial image' - it's *all* artificial, it's an illusion created in your heard whether it's stereo or 7.1 surround sound..... EOT..... |
Soundstage and depth of image
In article ,
Keith G wrote: In the same room, on the same source, I can flick to and fro between two amp/speaker pairings switching *imaging and depth* off and on like a bathroom light! But those speaker pairs can't possibly be in the same position. -- *OK, so what's the speed of dark? * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Soundstage and depth of image
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article , Keith G wrote: In the same room, on the same source, I can flick to and fro between two amp/speaker pairings switching *imaging and depth* off and on like a bathroom light! But those speaker pairs can't possibly be in the same position. No, but near as nick it: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/new%20kids01.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/new%20kids02.JPG http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/new%20kids03.JPG and, whilst the speakers might not move much, the leads are swapped back and forth frequently while I sod around with different kit combinations. The 'horns' image like there's no tomorrow and so do the SETs, together they are a killer combo but the horns will still image on SS and the Tannoys (not in those pix) image superbly well on the triodes. The OP asked if anyone gets 'holographic' imaging - the answer's *yes*, I do!! And before anyone starts on about reverb - the depth is pinpoint imaging moved *back and forth, side to side &c.* - not just opened out like 'cathedral' DSP effects...!! |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message ups.com... Eiron wrote: wrote: Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. JT - you really don't understand how a 'Gainclone' amp works. There is very little design or 'evolving' involved. You just buy a two dollar chip and copy the circuit from the manufacturer's datasheet. If you read the datasheet you will see that the amp is a power opamp, and is used with plenty of global negative feedback. If you really want to use it without negative feedback, put a capacitor from the inverting input to ground. You will have very high gain, high distortion and low bandwidth. Actually, you probably would like the imaging and depth! -- Eiron No good deed ever goes unpunished. Eiron, The Gainclones then prove to be an exception to a well held opinion. **Nope. They're cheap, reasonably well performing, easy to use and hard to destroy. Perhaps there is something in their circuit topography then that is different, or the way in which negative feedback is applied. **Nope. They're unexceptional in all regards, except that they're cheap, reasonably well performing, easy to use and hard to destroy. They have much shorter signal paths and are very simple. **Bull****. Gainclones are anything but simple. Like all power OP amps, they are incredibly complex beasties, owing to the limitations inherent in the IC manufacturing process. The output devices, for instance, are not the usual complementary symetry types (PNP & NPN), but use NPN types only. The shorter signal path thing is just another myth created by those con-men at 47 Labs. Unless, of course, you'd care to explain how a difference of (say) 4cm of signal path can be different to (say) 10cn of signal path. Please feel free to be as technical as you wish. Please include any measurements you feel necessary to justify your position. Maybe this makes a big difference ,and perhaps feedback applied in this context is sonically less obvious. **Why? The Gainclone, in common will all power OP amps uses huge amounts of Global NFB. Nothing special there. Open loop Voltage gain is in the order of 90dB. Closed loop will be around 26dB. That is one Hell of a lot of Global NFB. So this should make them even more fascinating. **Nope. It makes them ordinary. Maybe SS amp builders can learn something from them rather than dismiss them because they are not complex enough . **THEY ARE COMPLEX. Very complex. It's just that from the outside they appear to be simple. It is their simplicity and low which makes them attractive to low end amplifier manufacturers. This is why you find them in $199.00 all in one systems. Cheap, easy to use and hard to destroy. And maybe they could take the time to listen to them before dumping on them [with appropriate speakers]. **I can't speak for others, but I have used them. Many times over many years. High they ain't. They're cheap, reasonably well performing, easy to use and hard to destroy, however. They have their uses. There was a huge amount of prejudice against PWM /digital type amps by SS lovers but this is now starting to run out of steam as they improve and people actually listen to them. **Provided the speaker load is benign. Early switching amps had MAJOR problems, even with relatively easy loads. That includes the much heralded (and very expensive) ones. Current models are better, but still cannot drive many speaker loads satisfactorily. I have encountered some SS amps that that do image well.The Metaxas power amps were quite good [when they were working].These I believe used feedback,but also had very short signal paths. **Nope. Nothing special there. No short signal paths and great complexity. Amplifiers which operate perilously close to the limits of stability and are thermally inadequate hardly rate in the mainstream. Metaxas products suffer badly in these areas. Had Metaxas applied some proper measurement regimes and some decent design, his products may well be quite good. In their defence, they did use radically different topology to that of a Gainclone. Full complementary symetry outputs, etc. If you look into the Gainclones you discover that many people who like SETs also like Gainclones[in preference to other SS or digital type amps] and the simplicity of design of the two types is often used as an explanation for this. **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. 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. Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians. They don't match the SETs for tonal colour,but matched with a good tube preamp,and used with a decent power supply, they are capable of amazing sound[regardless of their cost but especially from a value for money perspective] **Utter, banal nonsense. However, please feel free to list all the technical reasons to back up your opinions. Please also list the following: * Any blind tests you have conducted to verify your opinions. * The music used to determine the above opinions. -- 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... Trevor Wilson wrote: "mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... **Apart from room acoustics (which was previously mentioned), the next things which need to be carefully considered a * Speaker quality. A speaker which has been designed to reduce 'diffraction effects' (rounded corners, etc) will affect image depth. * A valve preamp stage, due to it's microphonics, will add excessive and artificial depth to all recordings. Listen carefully and you will probably find that it also has a bloated and artificial width as well. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Trevor, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? **I deal in facts. I have used power OP amps many times, over many years. They're cheap, convenient, easy to use and adequate performers. High end they ain't. The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. **The people behind 47 Labs are niave con-men. The site is full of nonsensical terminology and outright lies. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. **Sure they probably do, since there are quite a few badly designed amplifiers on the market. There are also a huge number of properly designed amps on the market. Many use the same power OP amps that Gainclones use. Mostly, they're cheap as chips. -- 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: If you look into the Gainclones you discover that many people who like SETs also like Gainclones[in preference to other SS or digital type amps] and the simplicity of design of the two types is often used as an explanation for this. If the Gainclone uses an op-amp, the circuit is anything but simple. The fact that much of it is in one IC is neither here nor there. A simple pre-amp uses two transistors. -- *7up is good for you, signed snow white* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Soundstage and depth of image
Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Trevor Wilson wrote: "mb66" wrote in message oups.com... Hello, perhaps someone out there can help me - some years ago I purchased a hifi setup which relative to other kit I listened to sounded good. It was a Restek CD, Pre-amp and monoblocs, along with some Dynaudio Craft speakers. The sound was improved with some quality cardas golden cross leads and a Townshend seismic sink. My problem is this, when demo-ing speaker cables a friend who worked in a hifi shop in london let me listen to a system he had set up in the crudest manner but it had the most incredible depth of soundstage I have ever heard.. I played one track on it - it was the only cd I had with me by Crowded House, track was 'Four seasons in one day' - it was amazing I could picture each instrument so clearly - it was just so realistic. The system used was a TEAC VRCD? CD player, an Audionote valve integrated amp and some DALI bookshelf speakers propped up in the crudest of fashions. I have trudged hifi shops and home demo'd kit for the last five or so years to try and recreate that elusive sound vowing not to spend any more money on 'tweaks' until I can find it. Question is was that sound a fluke of the components and environment or was there a key component in there - perhaps the speakers? Anybody got a system out there that creates that holgraphic soundstage on the track I mention above? Unfortunately my friend moved on and I have never managed to get those components together again. Any feedback greatly appreciated.... **Apart from room acoustics (which was previously mentioned), the next things which need to be carefully considered a * Speaker quality. A speaker which has been designed to reduce 'diffraction effects' (rounded corners, etc) will affect image depth. * A valve preamp stage, due to it's microphonics, will add excessive and artificial depth to all recordings. Listen carefully and you will probably find that it also has a bloated and artificial width as well. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Trevor, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? **I deal in facts. I have used power OP amps many times, over many years. They're cheap, convenient, easy to use and adequate performers. High end they ain't. The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. **The people behind 47 Labs are niave con-men. The site is full of nonsensical terminology and outright lies. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. **Sure they probably do, since there are quite a few badly designed amplifiers on the market. There are also a huge number of properly designed amps on the market. Many use the same power OP amps that Gainclones use. Mostly, they're cheap as chips. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com September 1999 Everything You Know Is Wrong Or I Was Fooled by Mainstream Audio Gurus Review by Steven R. Rochlin Click here to e-mail reviewer Most of us have heard this before. Class A amplifiers are the best for music reproduction. Or how about single-ended tubes sound good because of all that second harmonic distortion. Oh, then there is the one about how speakers must be placed in cabinets so solid a nuclear warhead can not destroy 'em. Wait, i got another one. All amplifiers sound the same (said the newsgroup Borgs). Resistance is futile! Of course the best amplifiers are those newfangled 1.21 jigawatt high efficiency Class D digital amplifiers, right? Did i forget to mention that with amplifiers the bigger the better? "The more you know the less you understand" -- Tao Te Ching Just when i feel a good understanding about audio, something like the 47 Laboratories Gaincard comes along and destroys it. How stupid could i have been? A reviewer in this industry must have extreme honesty with a very open mind unhindered by the politics. Politics in this industry which make me really sick by the way and have no bearing on being honest to their readers. Simply having an open mind is one thing, but being honest and willing to go against all those preconceived notions and politics is another. It is called chutzpah! So there i was kicking myself in the butt about going to the Stereophile Hi-Fi '99 show in Chicago and not the great show happening at the same time in Germany. Aahhhh, Germany. The autobahn, Porsche... Nürburgring! In fact Hi-Fi '99 was a very casual and enjoyable show because there were no big crowds of people to contend with. While casually strolling through one of the lower levels i came upon a room which used the 47 Laboratories product. The room was sparse visually as i recall and what really got my attention were this very small product which was putting out incredibly good sound. A gentleman showed me this amplifier called the Model 4706 Gaincard which needed the Power Humpty power supply (gotta love the Japanese and their unique product names). The Gaincard was, well, this very small at 6.75" wide by 6" deep and 1.75" high that weighed only what seems to be a fraction of one pound! Seriously! Model 4706 Gaincard and Power Humpty The first thing i did was laugh. i just couldn't help it. C'mon, you probably would too after seeing all these big preamplifiers and amplifiers at the Hi-Fi Show only to come into this room and seeing this teeny tiny Model 4706 Gaincard and hearing it retails with the needed "Power Humpty" for $2,750! Just hearing the words Power Humpty still makes me laugh. My humble apologies, yet vision of Humpty Dumpty or people dancing to the song "Humpty Dance" by the Digital Underground fill my head. Ok, this proves my ignorance perhaps. Sad but true. So after being amused i regained my composure and listened to the benefits of this piece. After a few minutes i began to realize that this was either a hoax or something really special. The pessimist in me felt it more of a hoax, yet if 47 Laboratories was willing to send me a review sample i would give it a fair listen. After all, people still laugh at me when i tell them about once owning the now $90,000 Audio Note Ongaku 27 watt per channel all silver wired, ultra-purist, hand made only during nights with a full moon by vestal virgins. This is extremist single-ended integrated tube preamp/amplifier territory folks! "If a man wishes to be sure of the road he treads on, he must close his eyes and walk in the dark" -- St. John of the Cross Let us get one thing out in the open here, Sakura System's motto is "Only the simplest can accommodate the most complex." My personal love for all things Zen immediately came into action. Everyone by now knows that single-ended tube amplifiers use very few parts and this is considered by some as partially why really good SE tube amplifiers sound as they do (extremely transparent and amazingly musical). Upon learning more about the Model 4706 Gaincard i discovered that it contained the "world's smallest number of parts - nine parts per channel (excluding attenuators)" with also the "world's shortest signal pass length - 32 mm (including the length of parts)" according to their website. For those metrically challenged, this means that the entire signal path is less that two inches long! The Model 4706 Gaincard runs in Class AB and has negative feedback whose signal length is less than 1/2" long including the length of the resistor! Each channel is in it's own separate aluminum chassis compartment which they claim helps to "release vibrations smoothly". Each channel also has a 12-position attenuator. While a single Power Humpty can run the entire unit, you can use a second Power Humpty for true dual mono operation. Now to make this an even harder sell to your normal everyday audiophile, if there is such a thing, is that the total power output is 25 watts per channel. What did you expect, 1.21 jigawatts? Enough foreplay, it is music time baby! Upon first listen with one Power Humpty as supplied to me it was good, though i was not overly impressed. Maybe i was still trying to get over the small size and weight? After a few days of break in something mysterious happened. It was as though, as though... as though someone brought back my beloved Audio Note Ongaku! Ok, so maybe not exactly like the $90,000 Audio Note Ongaku, though there was so much rightness, so much freedom, so much musical soul. How can this be explained to those who have never heard this... The Ongaku is among the rare treasures on earth which allow the recorded music to transcend time and space and bring the musicians soul and intended musical message into one's listening room. It is more than transparency, more than correct harmonics, it is a freedom from what i call "beat" which is generally heard only during true live acoustic musical performances. If you are a drummer, it is the difference from playing the 4/4 beat and playing "in the pocket". There are very, very small timing cues which while not perfectly on the downbeat, they are playing a very small amount before or after the exacting beat timing which gives the music a unique feel, or soul. Alas, i have found that only the truly rare systems and products offer this type of rhythmically musical freedom. The Audio Note Ongaku, the Clearaudio Insider Gold MC cartridge, and now the 47 Laboratories 4706 Gaincard can be added to this very small list. While this might seem like making a big deal over such a small thing as timing cues, please remember that music is really nothing more than various frequencies occurring over time. "As is the human body, so is the cosmic body. As is the human mind, so is the cosmic mind. As is the microcosm, so is the macrocosm As is the atom so is the universe." --- The Upanishads This added freedom also shows how much deep inner resolution the Gaincard has. On music i have heard time and time again such as my favorite Miles Davis vinyl box set from Analogue Productions to my prized mint UK original pressing of Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon. As rarely heard, there is a deep inner detail and a seemingly infinite depth while the music washes over my soul. It is as though i sit here now trying to explain a more spiritually moving experience vs. the usual "here's another piece of equipment that does A, B and C, right but D could be better". The 47 Laboratories 4706 Gaincard transcends all this rubbish and goes into the rare realm that only pieces such as the Ongaku travel. From the very small harmonic details as each musical note decays to fast transient attacks, the Gaincard seemed untripable with my personal reference KEF 104/2 (modified) speakers. In fact the Gaincard even handled the new Magnapan 3.6 speakers, with their low sensitivity, quite well! Considering this is only 25 watts per channel, it actually did a very admirable job to the point of making me wonder about the advantages of using the Bryston 7B ST monoblocks that were also here for a brief period. Of course the volume point was limited with higher SPL listening session with the Magnapan, but this was not evident with small jazz and mellow classical music. "What is the sound of one hand clapping?" -- Zen Koan Yoshi was kind enough to supply me with a second Power Humpty for true mono operation with one power supply per channel. It was also at this time i read Herb Reichert's great review of this unit in Listener Magazine Volume 5 Number 2 Sprint 1999 (Steve sez: subscribe to Listener, one of the few great audio reads in the English language!). i was amazed that Herb did not cover more about adding the second power supply, though maybe he had his reasons. i can easily see how Herb can compare the Gaincard to the Ongaku. Herb is very qualified in making this comparison as he was previously the distributor of Audio Note gear in the USA. i found that adding the second power supply actually took away from the music. Sure it made the music tighter and added a bit more dynamics, yet this seemed to come at the expense of the flow and wonderful rhythmic ability i so enjoyed about the unit. After a few days of experimentation using the second Power Humpty, i removed it and never looked back. One power supply is all this, as Herb Reichert might call me, "Bohemian or a starvin' Marvin" needs. As Sakura Systems say "Only the simplest can accommodate the most complex" and who am i to argue? "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye" -- Antoine De Saint-Exupéry To wrap this up, it seems we have a very unique unit here which totally obliterates all preconceived notions. This solid-state, Class AB, negative feedback using unit totally blew me away. There is nothing, an i mean nothing that my ears have hear that comes close to sounding this good for under $3,000... or even $7,000 that i know of! The next step would probably be one of the better Wavelength Audio single-ended tube audio masterpieces. Many of you remember how i first brought the now seemingly legendary Lehmann Audio Black Cube into the worldwide audience. i can only hope this review has the same affect as the 47 Laboratories 4706 Gaincard is the rarest of musical instruments. Like finding a Stradivarius in a sea of mass produced student model violins. Why settle for the same electrical circuit rehashed when you can own a true handcrafted work of art like the Gaincard? My humble apologies for giving a full blow by blow detail of the unit, yet when your soul is moved by such a great device as the Gaincard, you lose all your own preconceived notions of a review and just allow the words to flow onto the page. Maybe it is better this way. Less thinking, more feeling... more music. Could life be any better? As an added bonus, Yoshi has graciously interviewed the main craftsmen at 47 Laboratories for us. Alas, since i speak no Japanese, i gave Yoshi my basic questions and he flew to Japan. Please read this interview by clicking here. "Knock on the sky and listen to the sound" -- Zen Saying "All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be" -- Pink Floyd Tonality 92 Sub-bass (10 Hz - 60 Hz) 75 Mid-bass (60 Hz - 200 Hz) 85 Midrange (200 Hz - 3,000 Hz) 95 High-frequencies (3,000 Hz on up) 95 Attack 90 Decay 95 Inner Resolution 95 Soundscape width front 95 Soundscape width rear 95 Soundscape depth behind speakers 95 Soundscape extension into the room 95 Imaging 95 Fit and Finish 90 Self Noise 100 Value for the Money 95 4706 Gaincard $1,250 4700 Power Humpty $1,500 (one quantity needed, two for true monoblock operation optional) Sakura Systems 2 Rocky Mt. Road Jefferson, MA 01522 Voice/Fax: 508-829-3426 Website: www.sakurasystems.com/ Manufacture Reply: Dear Steve: Thank you very much for a wonderful review on Gaincard amplifier. I translated the essence of your review for Mr. Kimura and Mr. Teramura and talked with them on the phone. Yoshi ) Hi, guys! Did you read the review? Kimura, Teramura ) Yes, we did! T ) It is very good, and I think Steve is right on target when he talks about subtle rhythmic variations created by musicians conveying heart and soul of music. That also explains what I call "activity" pretty well. Does he play drums or percussion himself? Y ) I think once he told me he plays drums. K ) Yes, many of our clients are musicians themselves. I also liked his way of writing very much. I don't know about his other reviews 'cause I've never read them, but it seems that he goes right into the essence of the design at least in this case. I hope we have this type of reviewing in Japan too. Y ) What do you think of his comments on adding extra power supply? K, T ) ------------(silence) T ) Anyway, he seems to understand the music and it's reproduction pretty well. Why don't we ask him to be our distributor instead of Yoshi? K ) Huh, worth consideration. Y ) Yeah, right-----. K ) Well, whatever waits in the future, please give our sincere thanks to Steve and Enjoy The Music.com. We are thoroughly impressed and thrilled by the review. So, thank you again, Steve. We hope that you check out other 47 Lab products too in the near future. Yoshi Segoshi/Sakura Systems We are a free publication with help through readers' contributions. Add Us To Your Favorites Make Us Your Homepage Link Your Website To Us This website best seen with the worlds only audiophile internet website browser. Click here to learn more! Copyright© 1995 through 2006 Enjoy the Music.com® May not be copied or reproduced without permission. All rights reserved. E-Mail Our Offices Advertising Information |
Soundstage and depth of image
"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. I know of *no* DIYer who isn't dubious/unsure about his own products or who doesn't elicit opinions from others. 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..... Do try to keep it real.... 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? Make your mind up - next you'll be telling us how *few* people use them.... But what a stupid, ****ing remark that was - I for one doubt you have ever heard a SET amplifier.** Clarity and detail is the very reason I use SET amps and I got there by trying just about everything else....!! 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..... ** If I'm wrong please feel free to cite examples of which make/model with which valves, as well as times and places and what sources, music and speakers were used.... |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote snip A mile of ********, from what I could see of it.... |
Soundstage and depth of image
"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. 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. 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. It's just that they have zero objectivity. Do try to keep it real.... **That's just it. I DO keep it real. I deal in facts, not fantasy. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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? -- 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... Trevor, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? **I deal in facts. I have used power OP amps many times, over many years. They're cheap, convenient, easy to use and adequate performers. High end they ain't. The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. **The people behind 47 Labs are niave con-men. The site is full of nonsensical terminology and outright lies. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. **Sure they probably do, since there are quite a few badly designed amplifiers on the market. There are also a huge number of properly designed amps on the market. Many use the same power OP amps that Gainclones use. Mostly, they're cheap as chips. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com SNIP Hearsay and utter, banal nonsense. **Here's some gems from those liars at 47 Labs: a.. World's smallest number of parts - 9 parts per channel ( excluding attenuators ) a.. World's shortest signal pass length - 32 m/m ( including the length of parts ) a.. World's shortest NFB loop length - 9 m/m ( including the length of the resistor ) a.. World's smallest filter/condenser - 1000µF, (50W version - 2200µF) a.. Rigid and compact aluminum chassis construction to release vibrations smoothly. Of course, there's much, much more. Let's not even get into the pricing of these ridiculous products. -- 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, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? **I deal in facts. I have used power OP amps many times, over many years. They're cheap, convenient, easy to use and adequate performers. High end they ain't. The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. **The people behind 47 Labs are niave con-men. The site is full of nonsensical terminology and outright lies. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. **Sure they probably do, since there are quite a few badly designed amplifiers on the market. There are also a huge number of properly designed amps on the market. Many use the same power OP amps that Gainclones use. Mostly, they're cheap as chips. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com SNIP Hearsay and utter, banal nonsense. **Here's some gems from those liars at 47 Labs: a.. World's smallest number of parts - 9 parts per channel ( excluding attenuators ) a.. World's shortest signal pass length - 32 m/m ( including the length of parts ) a.. World's shortest NFB loop length - 9 m/m ( including the length of the resistor ) a.. World's smallest filter/condenser - 1000µF, (50W version - 2200µF) a.. Rigid and compact aluminum chassis construction to release vibrations smoothly. Of course, there's much, much more. Let's not even get into the pricing of these ridiculous products. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Trevor, I agree completely with you about the pricing but the hi fi world is full of products which cost an absurd amount relative to the cost of their parts or construction.In fact this is almost standard for most high end products.How about Wilson and Avalon speakers for example? Similar but more powerful chip amps can be bought as kits for around US $300 and in this context they are a bargain. This topic began with a bloke frustrated with not being able to get decent imaging in his system. Many people never achieve this in their systems but there is signifigant anectodal evidence available through forums like this one that chip amps deliver the goods in this regard.What is most convincing about this evidence is that many people who make such comments already have excellent and expensive systems and are not some DIY punter that has no idea of what good sound is. I suggested that this bloke might want to try a chip amp as one of several things to consider in improving imaging on the back of this not inconsiderable anectdotal experience.It might not help his system or it might resolve the problem comprehensively.What is the harm in trying it though? Why should your opinion and experience count more than others ? You can justify any position using technical arguements.But are they the applicable ones?.You might want to take up the cause of Intelligent Design.-a group of similar mentallity Thought Police. |
Soundstage and depth of image
wrote in message ups.com... Trevor Wilson wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Trevor, Keep the spin coming Trevor.Or is it just dogma? **I deal in facts. I have used power OP amps many times, over many years. They're cheap, convenient, easy to use and adequate performers. High end they ain't. The Gainclone chip amps were evolved by the former Head of Design at Luxman.This is the man who dared to make tube amps and low negative feedback SS amps at Luxman during the 1970s when it was very unfashionable.[The Duo Beta series of SS amps] His amp and preamp designs are noted for their ability to image precisely[relatively anyway], which is something very rare in mainstream equipment from that era.Clearly he discovered similar traits with chip amps and this motivated him to start 47 Labs. **The people behind 47 Labs are niave con-men. The site is full of nonsensical terminology and outright lies. These things are not perfect,and the component cost might be low-but they really do put to shame even expensive and well designed SS amps when it comes to imaging precision and depth.Especially those with high damping factors and feedback. **Sure they probably do, since there are quite a few badly designed amplifiers on the market. There are also a huge number of properly designed amps on the market. Many use the same power OP amps that Gainclones use. Mostly, they're cheap as chips. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com SNIP Hearsay and utter, banal nonsense. **Here's some gems from those liars at 47 Labs: a.. World's smallest number of parts - 9 parts per channel ( excluding attenuators ) a.. World's shortest signal pass length - 32 m/m ( including the length of parts ) a.. World's shortest NFB loop length - 9 m/m ( including the length of the resistor ) a.. World's smallest filter/condenser - 1000µF, (50W version - 2200µF) a.. Rigid and compact aluminum chassis construction to release vibrations smoothly. Of course, there's much, much more. Let's not even get into the pricing of these ridiculous products. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com Trevor, I agree completely with you about the pricing but the hi fi world is full of products which cost an absurd amount relative to the cost of their parts or construction. **Non-sequitur. In fact this is almost standard for most high end products.How about Wilson and Avalon speakers for example? **Non-sequitur. Similar but more powerful chip amps can be bought as kits for around US $300 and in this context they are a bargain. **Huh? In what sense are 47 Labs products "bargains"? This topic began with a bloke frustrated with not being able to get decent imaging in his system. **And your explanation that it was likely to be a room problem was a good one. I concur. I also noted that he was listening through a valve preamp. That, IME, can also contribute to an overblown image. Many people never achieve this in their systems but there is signifigant anectodal evidence available through forums like this one that chip amps deliver the goods in this regard. **Power OP amps can certainly deliver respectable performance, for not much money. I never denied that. What I do attack is the notion that they are "simple" or that there is some kind of magic in their use. They are cheap, convenient and tough. Nothing more. Their sound quality is OK. Nothing more. It is for those reasons that they are found in cheap bottom of the line hi fi systems. What is most convincing about this evidence is that many people who make such comments already have excellent and expensive systems and are not some DIY punter that has no idea of what good sound is. I suggested that this bloke might want to try a chip amp as one of several things to consider in improving imaging on the back of this not inconsiderable anectdotal experience.It might not help his system or it might resolve the problem comprehensively.What is the harm in trying it though? **None at all. It would probably be easier, cheaper and faster to buy a decent, mass market product first, however. A budget Rotel would do the trick quite nicely and offer far better performance, into a wider range of loads than any power OP amp. Why should your opinion and experience count more than others ? **Because it is based on actual experience and a great deal of technical knowledge. I KNOW why power OP amps sound the way they do. You can justify any position using technical arguements.But are they the applicable ones? **Of course. There's no Supernatural. There's just reality. ..You might want to take up the cause of Intelligent Design.-a group of similar mentallity Thought Police. **Like I said: There's no Supernatural. Intelligent Design is just Creationism dressed up. The people behind and those who support 47 Labs probably buy into such nonsense. I don't. -- 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: Eiron wrote: e with high damping factors and feedback. JT - you really don't understand how a 'Gainclone' amp works. There is very little design or 'evolving' involved. You just buy a two dollar chip and copy the circuit from the manufacturer's datasheet. If you read the datasheet you will see that the amp is a power opamp, and is used with plenty of global negative feedback. Eiron, The Gainclones then prove to be an exception to a well held opinion. Thus indicating that an opinion being "well held" does not mean it has any actual value. :-) Perhaps there is something in their circuit topography then that is different, or the way in which negative feedback is applied.They have much shorter signal paths and are very simple.Maybe this makes a big difference ,and perhaps feedback applied in this context is sonically less obvious. So this should make them even more fascinating. Or maybe none of the above. :-) Maybe SS amp builders can learn something from them rather than dismiss them because they are not complex enough . Elron wasn't dismissing them. He was pointing out the inconsistency of your previous comments. [snip yet more "well held opinions" :-) ] 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 , Trevor Wilson
wrote: wrote in message Maybe SS amp builders can learn something from them rather than dismiss them because they are not complex enough . **THEY ARE COMPLEX. Very complex. It's just that from the outside they appear to be simple. It is their simplicity and low which makes them attractive to low end amplifier manufacturers. This is why you find them in $199.00 all in one systems. Cheap, easy to use and hard to destroy. Indeed. The advantage of using an IC as in the gainclone is that all the complexity is 'hidden' inside one small pack with just a few leads - making it easy for someone who lacks experience to use it to make an amp. The disadvantage of using an IC as in the gainclone is that all the complexity is 'hidden' inside one small pack with just a few leads - thus making any alteration of the complex circuit details inaccessible to an experienced or knowledgeable designer who might want to alter details to get improved performance or avoid some of the limitations of the IC. 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 , 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'... :-) 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 .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. |
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
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....... |
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 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09 PM. |
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