John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand your point. By habit, engineers try their best to design the best things they can. And as opposite of what is often pretended, they CARE a lot of the sound quality, reason why they had chose this job rather than an other branch.
They are not so stupid to not being concerned by ergonomic. It is often their boss witch reduce the price/quality, ask for more gadgets etc...
I think it is not so complicated to explain the things in a comprehensive way. But audiophiles prefer to put their fear in somebody with a nice voice more than in a clear demonstration and logic demonstration.
I'm not talking so much of getting an individual component up to some level of performance or not, rather that if a consumer does something seemingly silly or largely irrelevant to a system that the sound changes. So, either the "experts" need to have a list of all the pre-requisites for the device to perform adequately, or effective suggestions as to how mitigate these influences, or best of all, make the component robust ... meaning, no matter what the consumer does within reasonable limits that the behaviour of the component doesn't change.

A simple example: put different supports under an amplifier, the sound changes. How does the industry currently deal with that?

Frank
 
Last edited:
I have some questions you could more than likely answer but this thread and this forum is not the correct place to ask any questions.

Feel free to use the email link from the forum and we can "talk" offline. "Dr. Polymer" is the nickname Pete Millett gave me during my plastics days- now that I'm doing lubricants, metalworking fluids, and mold releases, he feels that "Dr. Fluids" sounds more intriguing.
 
their job as a reference headphone is not reproducing a resonance or space that isnt there. did you look at the page I linked? you couldnt have, as youve just parroted the same thing you said before again in different words, my (headphone system) chain is not lacking, my (headphone) chain does not have a resonance centered at 6.5kHz, my chain does not normally sound like the space is expanded. it (the resonant mode at 6.5khz) sounds similar to the effect of really bad jitter to me, which makes some sense.

the link shows fairly clearly and objectively what i'm talking about. the measurements I linked are done by the same person who did the ones you are basing your 'opinions' on (Tyll, who founded headroom and sold it a few years ago, now runs innerfidelity) Tyll did the headroom measurements. but these are later, more closely and with better equipment after some people started all saying the same thing, they are not neutral.
Not wishing to push more buttons, qush, but I note in that link, by the author:

It also appears to me that the mod shown here does something similar to the removable liner in the HD 800, so Sennheiser engineers have already done things to address damping in the headphone. My guess is that the stock HD 800 is a terrific compromise of many, many issues --- most of which none of us will ever know or appreciate --- but in sum I find it the highest expression of headphone engineering to date.

and

Frequency response comparison against the stock headphone shows it within a couple dB of the stock headphone, though slightly flatter to 10kHz, and slightly lower in level above that. To my ears, this mod makes a remarkable difference. For me it does change the HD 800 from a headphone that's brutally honest, to one that's simply honest. I think it really is a worthwhile modification.

and

The HD 800 is already the world's best dynamic headphone in my opinion. It images like no other.

All my experience in this audio game has shown me that a system goes through a phase of being "brutally honest", until the last ounce of tweaking has sorted out distortion issues. FR has never figured in this finessing, for me, so my tendency would be to believe that it is the same for headphones ...

Frank
 
Do you have some poor welding in your amp, or did-you use tubes ?
Humour, unfortunately, doesn't solve the problem ... :D, ;)

The forums run deep with anecdotes of that "effect", I have played with such quite a lot in the past ... now that I've addressed some of the underlying problems it's something I largely don't worry about - that robustness I mentioned earlier ... :)

The point is, parts within components are sensitive to vibrations, and the "experts", in audio, largely don't want to know about it. In one sense audio is a measuring instrument aiming for accuracy of 1 part in a million, and any scientist worthy of the name knows this can be bloody hard to do! 1 part in a thousand is dead easy, cheap as chips machinery can do this ... once past this point sloppiness in any area will be severely punished by "wrong" readings ...

Frank
 
yeah hes an hd800 fanboi from wayback, it was amazing he even admitted there was an issue. which says more about how many other people have brought the issue up.

yes, you only illustrate my point, you know THE POINT IVE BEEN MAKING FOR THE LAST 10 HOURS? what makes you think that music, even delicate well recorded music is supposed to hurt you if someone makes a slightly grating noise in the background? brutally honest as opposed to honest is a negative. is that how you experience life or just music? it must be really hard to get around the world with that condition. is it just something you reserve to keep your nervosa healthy along with all these conspiracies and thinking you know better than designers?
 
Last edited:
Fas42,
What you are describing is obviously a mechanical vibration of some component in your equipment. Yes changing the type of footer under the equipment will change that as each different type of material will have a different transfer function. A rubber foot is going to transfer energy different than a solid aluminum foot. That is easy to understand. But your real problem is internal to the equipment. If it is that bad you could encapsulate the entire electronics in a potting compound that would stop that or highly attenuate it. Don't attempt to repair the equipment after that as your out of luck after potting. Why not just isolate the offending piece of equipment inside a secondary enclosure such as a sealed box with the equipment suspended internally to the secondary enclosure? Your situation is easily understood by most everyone here, it is not some mystery of some magic component.
 
Time to take a break from this ... I'll just say that a certain approach to getting good sound has proven very effective for me; and part of that approach is to get the system to throw all the information it can retrieve, at me. Then, I sort out why some aspects sound "brutal", which I've always found to be due to system playback distortion ...

Frank
 
Your situation is easily understood by most everyone here, it is not some mystery of some magic component.
Of course it's understandable, therefore all reasonably priced components should be made sufficiently "robustly" so that this is no longer a problem, or a concern.

To use the car analogy, suppose all BMWs and Mercedes get a bad vibration at 70mph? Do you tell the customer to just "quickly accelerate through the trouble zone ..." ?

Frank
 
fas42,
Stay within the lines and off the Botts dots and the vibration will go away!

On a real note here, how can you expect the designer to presuppose the placement of every piece of equipment? Perhaps some may have the offending piece of equipment sitting on a vibrating shelf or even sitting directly on top of a speaker enclosure and transferring vibration directly into the device? But yes you are right that the equipment should be subjected to the entire frequency response range of a typical speaker system to see if this is happening. That is just a reasonable request of anything that is producing audio, not to self vibrate and produce spurious sounds from acoustical coupling.
 
So you're asserting that Sennheiser lack the engineering nounce to understand that they have a flawed product?

Frank

Yes, you know, one of the many small compromises spoken about in the text that you quoted. it was clearly and repeatedly demonstrated in the measurements that you have either conveniently ignored because it gets in the way of your argument about a component youve never heard, or not understood.

the resonance gets to me, as does the odd presentation, obviously something about my physiology or hearing acuity (i'm about 10 years younger than Tyll) means it grates on me along with the others who have brought this non-imaginary resonance up; more than it does those who can forgive it (or simply cannot hear it). I am not the only person who is effected by it and it is not in the recording, thus it is not honest, by definition.

given your argument above, can you possibly not understand that?
 
Last edited:
About vibrations problems, we used to test our amps on a vibrating machine yet in 1970 for the 2 type of trouble: generated noise, induced modulation.
If your amp have any of those 2 problems, and do not use microphonic tubes, it is a malfunction.
Vibration of a magnetic sheet too close from a wire, defective capacitance, etc.
Just imagine a mixing desk producing parasitic noises with the high level in speakers while you record a track !!! Never noticed such a problem for anything else that a bad connection/weld.
Poor cables can be microphonic too, with high impedances and huge amplification, like guitar mikes.

Take your speakers away from mechanical transmission vibrations to floor and walls, let your system lie on solid supports, care of your connections, that's all the concern.
Worry more about the vibrations in/from your transports (CD, turntable, tapes).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.