These effects exist, but somehow they cause no problem for 10G Ethernet, Thunderbolt, LTE and W-CDMA antenna feed lines, high-end VNA, spectrum analyzers, or oscilloscopes.
What we can hear and measure ? Resistance's noise and inductance. Caps serial parasitic inductance and resistance. Caps distortions, caps leakages.
A lot of things in silicon parts.
Obvious changes with schematics.
Obvious changes with proper cabling and shielding (pseudo symmetrical etc...) and good contacts.
Let-us concentrate on this because it is effective and can always be improved a lot.
A lot of things in silicon parts.
Obvious changes with schematics.
Obvious changes with proper cabling and shielding (pseudo symmetrical etc...) and good contacts.
Let-us concentrate on this because it is effective and can always be improved a lot.
Last edited:
Part of trouble, I believe, is that we humans are both blessed and cursed with very sensitive hearing, last time I checked it was of the order of 120dB dynamic range, with very smart autoranging. If we only had to deal with, say 60dB range of hearing capability these issues would be way under the table.
I would be as happy as anyone else here, not to have to worry with these things. But, I'm now very sensitive to the problems they cause, others may not be as much so, so I keep worrying about them.
And a further key reason, is that problems caused by these subtle things is what makes the "bad" recordings particularly unpleasant to listen to. My goal is to have no "bad" recordings, which I have only ever achieved by really fussing about these effects.
Frank
Edit: I would also suggest that all engineers ditch their conventional connectors for that "real" gear you mentioned, and replace with standard audio RCA, and speaker connection hardware ...
Last edited:
the lowest levels are only availble after many minutes of accomodation in very low noise environments - anechoic chambers
in daily life, listening to real live music 60 dB is often enough - there is the imfamous track with a Sousa Mrching Band recorded at -60 dB - with an invite to ABX - can you tell?
Audio DiffMaker
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/soli...-blowtorch-preamplifier-1470.html#post1749584
on dynamic rage limits:
Last edited:
Indeed. When you close the door, you first feel you're deaf.
VERY interesting, this Audio DiffMaker. Thanks so much for had allowed-me to discover-it. I used an analog comparator to evaluate my work: same idea.
Is this software usable on speakers ?
Yes, fair point, I have a test CD with a track attenuated by 20, 40, 60dB in successive tracks. The details in the last one can only be heard at maximum volume, with my head against the speaker driver.
However, instead of that Sousa, how about getting the clean Brahms version and compressing/clipping it viciously, ensuring it has up to 100% measured distortion. Then attenuate that by 60dB, and mix it with clean Brahms to create a new test track -- the difference signal is still 60dB or better, but do you believe people couldn't AB the clean and dirty versions ...?
Frank
You will have problems if they are not gold flashed surfaces/contacts/fingers. And, RFI rectification and harmonic generation is one such problem along with the usual (intemittant, noise, hum, etal).
Last edited:
We did Listening Tests on cables in 1979 Absolute Listening Tests-Further ProgressThere was a clear winner; Lightning Conductor. But even this wasn't 100% (audibly) accurate. There were some appalling Golden Pinnae 'low inductance' cables.
Dunno if our LC was O2 free but I doubt very much if any new millenium cable beats our 1979 winner.
Oh! and you can easily measure the differences and see if what goes in also comes out.
______________________
I sorta expected JC's answer to the challenge and it is unfair to subject him to a Blind Listening Test when his performance has already been tested. But I was hoping he would suggest some people with 6 sigma hearing to do battle on his behalf.
BTW, I was expecting him to spend however many hours/days it takes to set up Blowtorch first with his ancillaries so there is no doubt Blowtorch is performing optimally. Then his A team leaves the room while the Dynamic Duo + John Atkinson set up the competing B & C systems without disturbing JC's A team system. Finally the DD swap the A, B & C labels and battle commences with the Blind Listening Test Panel.
Need at least 5 in the panel for statistical significance on the DUT. Less if we are just testing the Panel (checking & calibrating the measuring instrument.) John Atkinson has my vote for a true golden pinnae. The DD can provide at least one more from their ABX team. Apologies to any statisticians out there.
No Burgundy for dis beach bum
Dunno if our LC was O2 free but I doubt very much if any new millenium cable beats our 1979 winner.
Oh! and you can easily measure the differences and see if what goes in also comes out.
______________________
I sorta expected JC's answer to the challenge and it is unfair to subject him to a Blind Listening Test when his performance has already been tested. But I was hoping he would suggest some people with 6 sigma hearing to do battle on his behalf.
BTW, I was expecting him to spend however many hours/days it takes to set up Blowtorch first with his ancillaries so there is no doubt Blowtorch is performing optimally. Then his A team leaves the room while the Dynamic Duo + John Atkinson set up the competing B & C systems without disturbing JC's A team system. Finally the DD swap the A, B & C labels and battle commences with the Blind Listening Test Panel.
Need at least 5 in the panel for statistical significance on the DUT. Less if we are just testing the Panel (checking & calibrating the measuring instrument.) John Atkinson has my vote for a true golden pinnae. The DD can provide at least one more from their ABX team. Apologies to any statisticians out there.
No Burgundy for dis beach bum
Low Ls is one factor for spkr cables -
I doubt that the appalling cable actually was very low Ls. Did you measure it? And what is the Ls of the "winning" cable? What are the numbers of each?
Never-the-less, low Ls is better than high Ls for dynamic tweeters if you dont want attenuation. But it is interesting that you did hear differences between speaker cables. Thx-RNM
I doubt that the appalling cable actually was very low Ls. Did you measure it? And what is the Ls of the "winning" cable? What are the numbers of each?
Never-the-less, low Ls is better than high Ls for dynamic tweeters if you dont want attenuation. But it is interesting that you did hear differences between speaker cables. Thx-RNM
Last edited:
You may want to run some numbers of actual wires and tweeters to determine significance.
This has been hashed over repeatedly, and Dick Greiner's excellent analysis still stands.
Tried this about 10 years ago, works well. The effect is measurable as a lower RF content.
Well, I suppose that SY is right. I AM selling a legend. After all, the CTC BLOWTORCH ended production, about 6 years ago, and will never be started again, so why have I been talking about how we built the Blowtorch preamp on this thread, over about as many years?
My reason was to pass on what we found WORKED in making the Blowtorch, and to fend off petty criticism of our approach to this project that we did when money was not so tight, and some customers just wanted the 'best' without regard to price.
Some might say that the Blowtorch was OVERBUILT and it could have been made much more cheaply. I say, go for it! If you or anyone can build something much less expensively that truly sounds just as good in their listening system over an extended period of time, then go out there and sell it to the public, with my blessing.
My reason was to pass on what we found WORKED in making the Blowtorch, and to fend off petty criticism of our approach to this project that we did when money was not so tight, and some customers just wanted the 'best' without regard to price.
Some might say that the Blowtorch was OVERBUILT and it could have been made much more cheaply. I say, go for it! If you or anyone can build something much less expensively that truly sounds just as good in their listening system over an extended period of time, then go out there and sell it to the public, with my blessing.
Did the same kind of tests with a very stable amp . Some subtle differences found with a pair of enclosures witch had a mountain like impedance curve.
No difference found with the BIG main monitors of the studio, witch where using a passive filter with near flat impedance curve (Impedance compensations).
I believe the only differences in first case was due to the serial resistance of the wire.
Any way, the differences we found were less than the ones we can feel one day after an other, due to humidity levels changes. And less than the ones you can get playing with the compensation cap in the feedback loop or the internal zobel of the amp.
The problem, John, is statements like direction of wires or breaking them are nonsense. Thus detracts from your technical credibility.
I can understand why snake oil vendors can play with such myths and legends near naive audiophiles, but, please, NOT YOU, John, Not you ! And not with us.
Thanks for the info
Baxandall paper
http://www.collinsaudio.com/Prosound_Workshop/Baxandall%20speakers%20as%20microphones.PDF
Two forums discussing ACE-BASS
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/64371-stahl-acebass-synthesis-loudspeaker-mechanical-parameters-electrical-means.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/104447-ace-bass-amplifier-design.html
George
P.S. kgrlee, I have mentioned neither reputation nor usual exagerations. Just courageous professional life path.
Who are the “Dynamic Duo “?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.