Because it has, dirty power supply , high or low humidity will throw off the sound of your system. Keep track of temp humidity and time of day and i will guarantee you the system will be most consistent in it's sonics.. ( all things remaining equal )
If you did it for a living or have the ability to differentiate subtleties you can and it's night and day to you then and yes without knowing the identity of source components.
Obvious copper you're from the school of " If i don't hear it, no one else can " If so then any kind of discourse is a waste of time .....
Hi CopperTop,
Yes, that is definitely a factor too. When people have an interest riding on the results, odd things happen with their observations. That's why many people who design and build audio stuff bow out of the tests or are very hard on themselves. You can't judge your own work.
Hi a.wayne,
Yes, but there is more to it as well. however, any clues are welcome ones. You just have to figure out how important they are and keep those in perspective.
Did you know that I find worse performance more often in some "high end names" than in products in volume production? This is both in auditioning and taking measurements. In other words, you can't go too far wrong with say - a Denon or Marantz than you can with a cult audio piece. It is also notable that many common brand name stuff is more reliable as well.
I think that might come down to having a team of trained people for every aspect. That is foiled against some designers that do the entire design where they have weaknesses in ability. The lone designer also is normally without a well equipped lab as well, so they are constantly having to guess. Not as much cross-pollination take place since they rarely discuss their designs (IP in the legal world) since they are special and gifted. Engineers tend to share ideas and compare what they are doing. They are mentally able to learn without suffering harm to their ego and take pleasure in teaching others learning. One person can only rarely successfully compete against a good team of engineers.
-Chris
Yes, that is definitely a factor too. When people have an interest riding on the results, odd things happen with their observations. That's why many people who design and build audio stuff bow out of the tests or are very hard on themselves. You can't judge your own work.
Hi a.wayne,
Yes, but there is more to it as well. however, any clues are welcome ones. You just have to figure out how important they are and keep those in perspective.
Did you know that I find worse performance more often in some "high end names" than in products in volume production? This is both in auditioning and taking measurements. In other words, you can't go too far wrong with say - a Denon or Marantz than you can with a cult audio piece. It is also notable that many common brand name stuff is more reliable as well.
I think that might come down to having a team of trained people for every aspect. That is foiled against some designers that do the entire design where they have weaknesses in ability. The lone designer also is normally without a well equipped lab as well, so they are constantly having to guess. Not as much cross-pollination take place since they rarely discuss their designs (IP in the legal world) since they are special and gifted. Engineers tend to share ideas and compare what they are doing. They are mentally able to learn without suffering harm to their ego and take pleasure in teaching others learning. One person can only rarely successfully compete against a good team of engineers.
-Chris
My wife thinks that the best amplifier is a Dolby Surround receiver - you know, the sort that 'decodes' L/R antiphase as 'surround' and pipes it to the rear speakers with a 30ms delay. She can spot when the Dolby's turned off, every time.
Does this mean she has Golden Ears?
If most people in a blind test thought that this was the 'best' amplifier, would that make it official?
Does this mean she has Golden Ears?
If most people in a blind test thought that this was the 'best' amplifier, would that make it official?
Means she has good perception and consistent memory, perfect for evaluating changes. You should have her tell you what your mods sound like ...
There is no disgrace in being tone deaf when it comes to hi-fi .....
Chris-
I agree somewhat , but committees do fail too , many design by committees were utter failures, every orchestra needs an conductor, regardless of the talent level ...
regards,
There is no disgrace in being tone deaf when it comes to hi-fi .....
Chris-
I agree somewhat , but committees do fail too , many design by committees were utter failures, every orchestra needs an conductor, regardless of the talent level ...
regards,
Last edited:
Well I rather think so too, for the opposite reason. Anyone from the school of "If I hear it, it must be real" is also equally boring. Listening to a bunch of people all from that school, churning the same myths and assumptions over and over again, and never coming to a conclusion, or attempting to put some 'proof' behind their assertions of Golden-Earedness is a waste of what could be an interesting discussion. Anyone not from that school who dips in with a post, is often shouldered out with vehement and unprovable assertions about the differences that can be heard between different resistors, coupled with a barrage of maths expertise, experience etc. - which may be very impressive but sometimes gives the feeling of being lectured to by an old workman with fixed ideas, like a plumber talking to some young upstart with new fangled ideas about plastic fittings. A discussion, it isn't.
Ohhh, Ok , so you are not full Ruskian ......
Actually, I am Polskian born in Siberia.
But still, the same topology. Despite this fact, in Siberia we have belief that vodka is cure for all illnesses. But it does not work for me!
Now, are you going to continue your search for the single cure for all topologies?
No straight answer. All depends on design. But I can't remember any design where I relied on a single feedback loop to cure "all illnesses".
Here is an example: fast opamp, with own loop of AC feedback (resistor and cap in series). The opamp drives 2-stage class A amp with amplification factor of 8 defined by own feedbcak. One more loop goes from output of this amp to input of opamp. This class A amp drives both speaker through resistor, and class C complementary voltage follower. The follower drives speaker, in parallel with class A amp. From speaker output I have one more loop, to the same input of opamp. As the result, we have at least 5 loops of feedback (except what we have inside of opamp), and when they are properly balanced we have smooth transfer function, low THD, high slew rate, low THD on all frequency range we are interested in, and nice transient response. Changing feedback ratio of any of that loops would lead to suboptimal results.
I like the discussions in Bruno Putzeys' article in Linear Audio Volume 1, "The F-Word". Opinionated but loveable, as used to be said about a TV personality in Los Angeles.
Brad
It does, Chris
And you are right, the same illness is reflected on other problems, like intermodulation of signals and their envelopes by phase and amplitude that sounds alien to perceprion of sounds. Especially, when they are high pitch signals, even ten microsecond between channels screws down image localization.
Moving one of the speaker by 3.4 mm would make a difference ?...
Are you serious , Wavebourn ??...
I heard in Siberia , everyone has 200 output tube OTL amps, in the ole days you could get Russian OTL amp or heater ...
Yes, and they work on firewood.
Yes, it will make a difference , 25mm it's a different system , 3.4 MM you will notice the change in focus ...
I was talking of a displacement but still in a statical position...
Even with a waving i doubt that it would have any audibility.
For such a position dependant quality of sound the listening room walls has to
somewhat be ressembling to some swiss cheese.....
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Yes, plus-minus shoe does not matter when you are far enough.
It had been proven in clean nice experiments with spark gaps and random people.
Yes, and they work on firewood.
Thermo-Electric Generators.
" The Improved Clamond Thermopile: 1879.
The EMF of this pile was no less than 109 Volts, with an internal resistance of 15.5 Ohms. The maximum power output was therefore 192 Watts, at 54 Volts and 3.5 Amps.
This pile was fired by coke. The hot junctions were at C, while the cold junctions D were cooled by sheet iron as in the original design above. What purpose was served by the tortuous path T-O-P taken by the hot gases is unclear, because there seem to have been no hot junctions in the inner sections.
This beast was 98 inches high and 39 inches in diameter...
"A Russian thermo-electric generator based on a kerosene lamp.
This lamp was introduced in 1959, once again to power radios. Presumably there were parts of Russia that Stalin's electrification program had not reached. The output voltage(s) are unknown, but since a picture is known to exist of it powering a valve radio, HT must have been generated somehow, possibly by a vibrator power supply.
(In this context a vibrator is an electromechanical device, similiar to an electric bell, that chops low-voltage DC into crude AC that can be applied to a step-up transformer. They were widely used in car radios before semiconductors arrived)
I have just been informed by Pine Pienaar that he has seen one of these things, and it yielded both 1.5 and 90 Volts, so it could replace a composite dry battery with the same output voltages. Such batteries were once widely used to operate small radios.
Such radios typically used four 7-pin valves and needed a 90V HT supply at around 12mA and a 1.5V filament supply at 125mA or 250mA depending on the valves used.
...
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.