John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
True dat , i do agree with Demian about a curve array = Linesource ..?
It try to imitate a point source situated at the center of the curve... adding the multiple sources interferences...
I stay stuck with compression drivers and horns for their various advantages.
Better efficiency. Better dynamic.
Controlled directivity (avoid some room resonances).
Membranes of little diameter allowing huge bandwitths, only way to minimise the ways and their crossover.

Resonances of horn are an old story, with spherical ones (Thanks to J.M.Le Clearc'h and Delamare).
Distortions due to air compression is, niether, not an issue for home reproduction.
 
Cant agree , a good linesource images vastly superior to a point source, has better dynamics and lower distortion ...


Please have a look at Don Keele's line array Don Keele's CBT (Constant Beamwidth Transducer) Page. It is only good in imaging because Keele makes a line array behave like a point source.

Agree that it is not easy to design a point source with sufficiently low distortion at high SPL, but it can be done.
 
Im not sure if you are in agreement or not Vacu ....? Obviously Keele is not the only one getting them to work , when done correctly point source pales by comparison , depth , width , not to mention the splash from most if not all 1 inch domes ...

Chuckle when some pay 100K plus for a single tweeter drive system ...
 
AX tech editor
Joined 2002
Paid Member
Im not sure if you are in agreement or not Vacu ....? Obviously Keele is not the only one getting them to work , when done correctly point source pales by comparison , depth , width , not to mention the splash from most if not all 1 inch domes ...

Chuckle when some pay 100K plus for a single tweeter drive system ...

I think the point ;) is that, when correctly done, a curved array approaches a point source, which sort of proves the ehh, point, doesn't it?

Jan
 
It try to imitate a point source situated at the center of the curve... adding the multiple sources interferences...
I stay stuck with compression drivers and horns for their various advantages.
Better efficiency. Better dynamic.
Controlled directivity (avoid some room resonances).
Membranes of little diameter allowing huge bandwitths, only way to minimise the ways and their crossover.

Resonances of horn are an old story, with spherical ones (Thanks to J.M.Le Clearc'h and Delamare).
Distortions due to air compression is, niether, not an issue for home reproduction.

Horns do have good jump factor and a linesource does have most of their benenfits except sensitivity , but i cant get past (horns)their coloration, shout and lack of coherency , everyone prioritizes what they want in their system , big amplification is not a problem neither is bi or tri- amping and audio is about compromises and the limitation of such, get the negatives balanced right and you get closer to the source.
 
Last edited:
I think the point ;) is that, when correctly done, a curved array approaches a point source, which sort of proves the ehh, point, doesn't it?

Jan

No because i never specified a curve array now did i :) and as stated before its behavior is not like a linesource , its benefits, trade size to maintain coverage and IME they definitely do not image as well as a true linesource in a domestic situation .
 
but i cant get past (horns) their coloration, shout and lack of coherency
That was true for bad designed horns...
Believe-me, i can't afford this kind of 'PA' sound you refer to.
Believe-me, my wooden spherical horn don't have any kind of coloration. Each record sound different, voices are very natural, you can believe the singer is just in front of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXdHOeX6vss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoWSvjDg-U0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tg2DVPv7c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIVhg_YUYSM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj47yYIDUh0
 
I want that TT, talk about fetish object. :)
I really enjoy the whispers "What a beautiful speakers" and all those 'gourous' actings and psychological manipulations to try to sell their outpriced "best speakers in the world" (arf)...
And the atmosphere of great Mass !
One thing that really enjoy-me too is all the musical parts they chose for their demonstrations in between millions of so beautiful records existing on the market are just... junk :)
 
Last edited:
That was true for bad designed horns...
Believe-me, i can't afford this kind of 'PA' sound you refer to.
Believe-me, my wooden spherical horn don't have any kind of coloration. Each record sound different, voices are very natural, you can believe the singer is just in front of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXdHOeX6vss
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoWSvjDg-U0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tg2DVPv7c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIVhg_YUYSM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj47yYIDUh0

I hear you and even thou i have heard a tremendous amount of horn systems I'm not naive enuff. To think others haven't figured it out , so i will remain agnostic , Linesource until such time ....
 
I hear you and even thou i have heard a tremendous amount of horn systems I'm not naive enuff. To think others haven't figured it out , so i will remain agnostic , Linesource until such time ....
Well, we can hear some colorations (difficult to separate from the rooms's ones) in those bad recordings, for sure. It is a long run to set a good crossover too.
My speakers are different, because the medium/hight is corrected to be flat in energy (a slowly descending curve) *and to be flat in impedance*. That makes all the difference... this, and the price (no guru whispering in my ears: "Your eyelids are heavy, you can hear only my voice.")...

This said, i have to confess i prefer Ferraris to Rolls Royces.(Or Subarus to Mercedes)
 
Last edited:
no cartridge offset angle, no antiskating
While i was young (~70th), and working for Scientelec, i remember i had deposed for them a patent for a radial servoed arm. As the patent for a mobile arm on a chariot was owned by 'Clement', i had the idea to move the plate instead of the arm. :)
It have some advantages, as it is easy to filter the vibrations generated by the chariot and his motor in a very simple way.

My second idea was to fix the arm on a second rotating plate, like this:
http://www.esperado.fr/creations_audio/une_idee_de_bras_radial.html
and ensure that a light ray emitted just under the Diamond (on a parallel arm situated under the plate) always crosses the center of the plate vertical. Any deviation fire a motor witch turn the second plate until it is perpendicular again.
You can do-it mechanically, with a second pivot (the red line in the image):
http://www.esperado.fr/images/stories/electronique/bras-def-petit-meca.gif
 
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2002
Paid Member
I've always thought there must be a reason it can't work since it seems like a good answer.

Apart from the inconvenient length of the arm, I can’t think of any other disadvantage.
It will not cost much money nor a lot of time for to try it.


You can do-it mechanically,

Esperado
For such sort of arms, you may like to explore these threads
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/165878-angling-90-tangential-pivot-tonearms.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/238027-diy-linear-tonearm.html


"This forum works just like a court applying Sharia, led by Ayatollahs.
A permanent abuse of power, a pure shame!
"
:smash:

George
 
Apart from the inconvenient length of the arm, I can’t think of any other disadvantage.
The angle error is much more than with an angled arm, which has no angle error on two different diameters on the record.


For such sort of arms, you may like to explore these threads
Thanks, George. I knew one of those threads. While, i'm using 10 minutes a year my modified Linear servoed arm Technics SL-7 turntable, and digital the remaining time ;-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.