Frank, a small correction. I own a double CD by the Seekers, and it's titled "The New Seekers", It seems they went through some personnel changes in the early 70ies, however the girl remained the same. And, most fortunately, their sound remained crystal ckear as ever, no gimmicks, just music.
Speaking of music, I have request.
Sometime in the early 80ies, around 1983 I think, a group I have never heard of called Triton had a version of the Stones' "I Can't Get No Satisfaction". The original was good, but their version was out of this world. Despite everything I did, I could not find it anywhere, over all these years. So, if anyone can give me pointer of any kind, I'd be very grateful. The key points ate:
Triton, cca 1983, "I Can't Get No Satisfaction".
Speaking of music, I have request.
Sometime in the early 80ies, around 1983 I think, a group I have never heard of called Triton had a version of the Stones' "I Can't Get No Satisfaction". The original was good, but their version was out of this world. Despite everything I did, I could not find it anywhere, over all these years. So, if anyone can give me pointer of any kind, I'd be very grateful. The key points ate:
Triton, cca 1983, "I Can't Get No Satisfaction".
Dejan, The New Seekers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia are almost entirely another bag of fruit ...
And, because you're a good bloke
, TRITONS "I can't get no SATISFACTION" 1973 - YouTube ...
And, because you're a good bloke
, TRITONS "I can't get no SATISFACTION" 1973 - YouTube ...My supplier Rapid Electronics was bought by German Conrad. Gradually Rapid is changing. The most obvious is the bargain products are becoming stocked in lower numbers. All I wanted was some cheap test leads to replace the ones that were broken. Big problem. They have none or on long delivery. So I go to plan B and buy a cheap test meter that is perhaps 120% the price of just the cables. Called a Mastech MS8233EL I thought it possibly OK to check out my car. Shock of shocks it is almost as good as my posh meters. It is auto-ranging which I haven't had for years. Now where it beats them all, it switches off. I am awful at that. I didn't expect it to be 25% as good. 95% in truth. It is small but not too small. It has the rubber surround of a posh meter. Sometimes the worst is the best.
I bought some stacking cables with alligator clips. Forgot how good they are to use, an extra pair of hands. By accident I have what I need. A Fluke meter is mostly no better as I can calibrate from references. Without the alligators clips the Fluke is not so useful.
My new computer is 64 Bit. My test gear won't work with it. I am rebuilding the old one to work in XP to do that. For now I am using my years old oscilloscope. I forgot how good it is and how easy. No spectrum to log so ultimately not 100%. I do use the scope now and again but now I actually calibrate it. Something is easier about it but not sure what.
Frank I know what you are saying. My OB speakers do it. Extreme laziness and the like has prevented me finishing the project. Seeing as that project has been in my mind since Robin Marshal planted when showing his ES14 speakers I might forgive myself. I am quick for friends, quicker for my boss, not quick for me.
One of the reasons the OB speakers are not finished is I need to drive 30 miles and borrow Loricrafts workshop and some help. I will try Celotex insulation panels as the polystyrene is too fragile, a friend is donating some from his recent build ( He just bought Tannoy Lancaster's, No treble was a WD 40 fix in the switch ). I don't want to use wood as it becomes a sounding board. It will be a simple wood frame with mitres using 4 x 1 inch from the builders merchant.
I bought some stacking cables with alligator clips. Forgot how good they are to use, an extra pair of hands. By accident I have what I need. A Fluke meter is mostly no better as I can calibrate from references. Without the alligators clips the Fluke is not so useful.
My new computer is 64 Bit. My test gear won't work with it. I am rebuilding the old one to work in XP to do that. For now I am using my years old oscilloscope. I forgot how good it is and how easy. No spectrum to log so ultimately not 100%. I do use the scope now and again but now I actually calibrate it. Something is easier about it but not sure what.
Frank I know what you are saying. My OB speakers do it. Extreme laziness and the like has prevented me finishing the project. Seeing as that project has been in my mind since Robin Marshal planted when showing his ES14 speakers I might forgive myself. I am quick for friends, quicker for my boss, not quick for me.
One of the reasons the OB speakers are not finished is I need to drive 30 miles and borrow Loricrafts workshop and some help. I will try Celotex insulation panels as the polystyrene is too fragile, a friend is donating some from his recent build ( He just bought Tannoy Lancaster's, No treble was a WD 40 fix in the switch ). I don't want to use wood as it becomes a sounding board. It will be a simple wood frame with mitres using 4 x 1 inch from the builders merchant.
Last edited:
Dejan, The New Seekers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia are almost entirely another bag of fruit ...
And, because you're a good bloke
Many heartfelt thanks, Frank, this really made my day.
From the posts, I notice that I wans't the only one to have to wait until 1983 to hear it. It's dear to me because that was the time I hooked up with my wife-to-be, and I distinctly remember haring one beuatiful spring day, I had just escorted he to work and was moving towards home, when a vebdour switched his poratble radio on, and presto! there it was.
Now at least I know who to look for. As for where, we'll see.
Dejan I thought you should have the Old Seekers. My goodness that's one person I am still in love with. More so as I have grown up a bit. I used to keep it to myself. Now I would be proud.
I have an album. Alas the recording is so so.
Judith Durham - The Seekers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsIbfYEizLk
Didn't know she covered this !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwxF8hfxx64
Another lady I forgot. She won a talent show that ran every week. The Beatles spotted her and Apple gave her a contract. Not heard of her for years. Welsh girl I think?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GielMXWQlbw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBySxbKmbEc
I have an album. Alas the recording is so so.
Judith Durham - The Seekers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsIbfYEizLk
Didn't know she covered this !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwxF8hfxx64
Another lady I forgot. She won a talent show that ran every week. The Beatles spotted her and Apple gave her a contract. Not heard of her for years. Welsh girl I think?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GielMXWQlbw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBySxbKmbEc
Last edited:
With a little fiddling you could get this circuit to do what you want http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...imate-weapon-fight-jitter-11.html#post2710526 . It can really deliver less than 1 nV/rtHz noise if you need. I would add some current limiting for a 1A regulator and rework the devices for more dissipation. Do you really need nV/rtHz noise levels? For a few pieces the LT regulators LT1084 - 7.5A, 5A, 3A Low Dropout Positive Adjustable Regulators - Linear Technology work well and even though they are expensive chips the end result happens much faster if they meet the other requirements. Does the circuit have ANY power supply rejection?
Thanks Damian . I remember doing the research for this and giving in as time was against me a year ago. Looking up LM1084/5 I notice it equals LM317 and suddenly a well walked route opened up.
LM 723 is if I am correct is from the LM741 era? It is 14 pin DIL and <$1. It can pass 150 mA. With a pass transistor it can do better. This includes series and shunt options. 2.5 uV noise if bypassed with 5 uF. 20 uV without. I could try banking LM723 as I might get the better noise outcome than additional noise of PNP output, in fact is might be <1uV( noise cancelling ). Some head scratching if I do. Anti hogging without spoiling noise. Perhaps the wires become the feed in resistors?
I thought to make supply rejection Dejan style. That is that it almost gives the regulator nothing to do. Will look good also with loads of capacitors.
Some say what I have a handful of works well. TL431 and D45, two dinosaurs. That's a surprise as without checking I assumed TL431 to be useless. Must say it works delightfully well and has tons of data on oscillation avoidance. There was a Wenzel circuit also if I remember? Seemed better to me to solve the problem without doing that ( anti-phase noise null with bootstrap if I remember = -15 dB better ) . Ideal for existing regulators especially where SMD.
Naim put me wise to something. Extra regulators will very cheaply isolate sections. I have done no research, it sounds plausible. If unclear they were saying given one unregulated rail supply each part you can from a regulator. This also spreads the load. A regulator can dissipate 1 watt is my guess without harm so scope is big. I dare say some circuits might need a load resistor to get the regulator into it's happy zone.
One thing I might try is remote regulation . That is where an additional wire comes back from the power out DC plug so as to be exactly 12 V regardless of load. A thick piece of cable is possibly a better idea? What might be great is very thick 0 V and thin 12 V and a sense wire. Thin wire might loose 0.3 V max to min. Why not ? This means the standard plug has been upgrade as if using 2 x 2 mm cables which would not fit. I would have to try both as it seems a shame to have 0R3 from the output to plug.
My instinct is to think as long as 1 MHz speed of the PSU is unimportant. Even if 1 kHz it would be fine. Reason is all high speed functions come from local decoupling of DAC etc. This might even negate ultra low noise. It could even help to have 0R3 as it would form more of a filter with the decoupler? Those horrible ceramic 100 nF power the world? From reading people I don't think this is realized. They hold out for 30 MHz and never question how cheap things work, they do work and that is the proof. No way is a 1500 MHz video amp going to work better because the PSU has been upgraded to 30 MHz from the usual 1 MHz. None the less TL431/D44 ( 45 ) will tick the Audiophile box.
LM 723 is if I am correct is from the LM741 era? It is 14 pin DIL and <$1. It can pass 150 mA. With a pass transistor it can do better. This includes series and shunt options. 2.5 uV noise if bypassed with 5 uF. 20 uV without. I could try banking LM723 as I might get the better noise outcome than additional noise of PNP output, in fact is might be <1uV( noise cancelling ). Some head scratching if I do. Anti hogging without spoiling noise. Perhaps the wires become the feed in resistors?
I thought to make supply rejection Dejan style. That is that it almost gives the regulator nothing to do. Will look good also with loads of capacitors.
Some say what I have a handful of works well. TL431 and D45, two dinosaurs. That's a surprise as without checking I assumed TL431 to be useless. Must say it works delightfully well and has tons of data on oscillation avoidance. There was a Wenzel circuit also if I remember? Seemed better to me to solve the problem without doing that ( anti-phase noise null with bootstrap if I remember = -15 dB better ) . Ideal for existing regulators especially where SMD.
Naim put me wise to something. Extra regulators will very cheaply isolate sections. I have done no research, it sounds plausible. If unclear they were saying given one unregulated rail supply each part you can from a regulator. This also spreads the load. A regulator can dissipate 1 watt is my guess without harm so scope is big. I dare say some circuits might need a load resistor to get the regulator into it's happy zone.
One thing I might try is remote regulation . That is where an additional wire comes back from the power out DC plug so as to be exactly 12 V regardless of load. A thick piece of cable is possibly a better idea? What might be great is very thick 0 V and thin 12 V and a sense wire. Thin wire might loose 0.3 V max to min. Why not ? This means the standard plug has been upgrade as if using 2 x 2 mm cables which would not fit. I would have to try both as it seems a shame to have 0R3 from the output to plug.
My instinct is to think as long as 1 MHz speed of the PSU is unimportant. Even if 1 kHz it would be fine. Reason is all high speed functions come from local decoupling of DAC etc. This might even negate ultra low noise. It could even help to have 0R3 as it would form more of a filter with the decoupler? Those horrible ceramic 100 nF power the world? From reading people I don't think this is realized. They hold out for 30 MHz and never question how cheap things work, they do work and that is the proof. No way is a 1500 MHz video amp going to work better because the PSU has been upgraded to 30 MHz from the usual 1 MHz. None the less TL431/D44 ( 45 ) will tick the Audiophile box.
Thank you for the honours, Nige ("... Dejan style...), but it's not mine at all.
I saw it first, used with a MOSFET, in a Technics "de luxe" preamp, and they called it a "virtual battery", which as you know I did adopt.
Next, I saw something very similar in Krell power amps from the early 90ies. They just called it a regulator.
I built it several times and it's always done right by me. Never oscillated. Very scaleable, you are free to determine your own requirements starting from basic filtering to determining the purity of the output by scaling the "after the fact" capacitor. I like to stick to 2,200 uF values for both sides, although on the input side it's really doubled since two are put in parallel.
Also, you can choose your power device, I suspect you might opt for MOSFETs. Only one thing you need to be careful with, and that's how you cool the transistors, whatever they are. The more current you want to darw, the bigger the heat sink you need to use. In the early days, I was careless with it and really almost fried the transistors due to weak heat sinks. A stupid mistake, careless omission of basic calculations.
I have heard it said that Darlington transistors fare well in that place, like TIP 142/147, 100 watters, beucause they have a much greater gain factor and a smaller output impedance. Do consider this as well. I have not tried ut with Darlingtons.
I saw it first, used with a MOSFET, in a Technics "de luxe" preamp, and they called it a "virtual battery", which as you know I did adopt.
Next, I saw something very similar in Krell power amps from the early 90ies. They just called it a regulator.
I built it several times and it's always done right by me. Never oscillated. Very scaleable, you are free to determine your own requirements starting from basic filtering to determining the purity of the output by scaling the "after the fact" capacitor. I like to stick to 2,200 uF values for both sides, although on the input side it's really doubled since two are put in parallel.
Also, you can choose your power device, I suspect you might opt for MOSFETs. Only one thing you need to be careful with, and that's how you cool the transistors, whatever they are. The more current you want to darw, the bigger the heat sink you need to use. In the early days, I was careless with it and really almost fried the transistors due to weak heat sinks. A stupid mistake, careless omission of basic calculations.
I have heard it said that Darlington transistors fare well in that place, like TIP 142/147, 100 watters, beucause they have a much greater gain factor and a smaller output impedance. Do consider this as well. I have not tried ut with Darlingtons.
You know MOSFET's might be OK. I only need 12 V 1 A I believe?
The idea of 10 x LM723 looks possible. No one on the internet has thought of it so on my own.
As you say Dejan calculation of heat sink and reality can be different. The Hypex power amps were the only time it went the other way. They almost need no heat sink. I suspect for real music with convection cooling Hypex UCD 180 could give full power and be bolted to glass! Some would like that and it is just possible it could sound better.
The crazy thing about this project is reducing inaudible noise to a lower inaudible level could make things worse. That is to replace white noise with spiky noise. I was reminded of this recently. I have a 12-0-12 PSU. In fact I have 1000 pieces. It also has 5 V 600mA. The 5 V is at 11.42 V unregulated . I need a -9 + 27 V PSU. By drilling out copper I soon had that. The 27 V was a simple revision of the 24 V before. The common 0 V drilled off the PCB. The 11.42 V is only possible because the UK still has 240 V when my house. I choose to use the amplified zener route and BD140 as the volt drop is lower than most regulators. I settled on 8.5 V.
On the scope the LM series regulator was as always. High hiss and spiky with sawtooth ripple residuals. The BD140 had twice the ripple voltage yet no hiss worth mentioning. It's ripple almost a pure sine wave due to zener cap and multiplier nature of pass device. I was very surprised and thought it noteworthy. Sure I have seen it before, still is interesting how the circuit I was told to ignore in 1972 at college has some advantages. Goldmund thought so as they used amplified zeners to the VAS etc.
One thing I read is Darlingtons in multipliers seldom work well. My tests said the reason is one transistor does all the work. I think this is due to Early effect. Certainly the ripple is disappointing. The only MOSFET one I built was superb. It ran 450 V 100 mA. I dare say a complimentary feedback pairs worth a though as I believe that should divide the work. What does work is cascaded bipolar multipliers.
I made a rather distressing discovery when building a state of the art Phono PSU. Simple RC cascades work better for noise ( small R big C ). As the op amp will work with 3 V voltage tolerance I choose to go unregulated ( 10.5 to 13.5 +/-, nominal 12 ) . 3 V will cover 230 V +/- 10 % . I have some zeners to catch the output should it go high. On scope they do nothing when at correct mains voltage. To be naughty I used a centre tapped voltage doubler and two soft recovery diodes. I won more than I lost doing that as the load is very small.
Ethernet over mains. Nothing seems to stop it being measured in preamps. I guess it has to be this way as it must penetrate the path it takes. Can it be cheaply stopped from entering a preamp? I don't even know it's centre frequency. When I searched for data it wasn't easy. I would try a reactor circuit. That is a class X2 cap and series choke across the mains from phase to neutral. This causes a phase shift at that frequency. About 20 dB reduction on one I built. I got rid of switch mode noise that way from PSU's . The residuals also look nicer as well. Formula is as any LC circuit. 100 nF is a good starting point.
The idea of 10 x LM723 looks possible. No one on the internet has thought of it so on my own.
As you say Dejan calculation of heat sink and reality can be different. The Hypex power amps were the only time it went the other way. They almost need no heat sink. I suspect for real music with convection cooling Hypex UCD 180 could give full power and be bolted to glass! Some would like that and it is just possible it could sound better.
The crazy thing about this project is reducing inaudible noise to a lower inaudible level could make things worse. That is to replace white noise with spiky noise. I was reminded of this recently. I have a 12-0-12 PSU. In fact I have 1000 pieces. It also has 5 V 600mA. The 5 V is at 11.42 V unregulated . I need a -9 + 27 V PSU. By drilling out copper I soon had that. The 27 V was a simple revision of the 24 V before. The common 0 V drilled off the PCB. The 11.42 V is only possible because the UK still has 240 V when my house. I choose to use the amplified zener route and BD140 as the volt drop is lower than most regulators. I settled on 8.5 V.
On the scope the LM series regulator was as always. High hiss and spiky with sawtooth ripple residuals. The BD140 had twice the ripple voltage yet no hiss worth mentioning. It's ripple almost a pure sine wave due to zener cap and multiplier nature of pass device. I was very surprised and thought it noteworthy. Sure I have seen it before, still is interesting how the circuit I was told to ignore in 1972 at college has some advantages. Goldmund thought so as they used amplified zeners to the VAS etc.
One thing I read is Darlingtons in multipliers seldom work well. My tests said the reason is one transistor does all the work. I think this is due to Early effect. Certainly the ripple is disappointing. The only MOSFET one I built was superb. It ran 450 V 100 mA. I dare say a complimentary feedback pairs worth a though as I believe that should divide the work. What does work is cascaded bipolar multipliers.
I made a rather distressing discovery when building a state of the art Phono PSU. Simple RC cascades work better for noise ( small R big C ). As the op amp will work with 3 V voltage tolerance I choose to go unregulated ( 10.5 to 13.5 +/-, nominal 12 ) . 3 V will cover 230 V +/- 10 % . I have some zeners to catch the output should it go high. On scope they do nothing when at correct mains voltage. To be naughty I used a centre tapped voltage doubler and two soft recovery diodes. I won more than I lost doing that as the load is very small.
Ethernet over mains. Nothing seems to stop it being measured in preamps. I guess it has to be this way as it must penetrate the path it takes. Can it be cheaply stopped from entering a preamp? I don't even know it's centre frequency. When I searched for data it wasn't easy. I would try a reactor circuit. That is a class X2 cap and series choke across the mains from phase to neutral. This causes a phase shift at that frequency. About 20 dB reduction on one I built. I got rid of switch mode noise that way from PSU's . The residuals also look nicer as well. Formula is as any LC circuit. 100 nF is a good starting point.
Ages ago I said why not use the largest possible capacitors and reduce earthing problems. Someone said " you mean German style amplifiers". Seems I do. These look very reasonably priced. If the local decoupling at the dumpers are high grade I think this is the better way to go. I suspect low Z 2200 uF 105C an excellent choice per dumper.
If the ripple ratings are OK on the main caps ( assume 3 times worse than 4 R maximum power I would say ) do we fit more to please the eye alone? When insisting more is best is it just an expensive way to keep the VAS clean. Think about this. If true you did a very bad thing. A capacitance multiplier would only loose 3 V maximum ( VAS feed ). It's residuals are almost sine wave and not saw tooth. To loose 3 V also gives delightful clipping performance. If the ripple doesn't reach down to that level then the amp will be clean. The dumpers will act as regulators. Not only that they are fast ones.
Electronic Components/Capacitors/Electrolytic Capacitors/Radial Electrolytic Capacitors | Rapid Online
If the ripple ratings are OK on the main caps ( assume 3 times worse than 4 R maximum power I would say ) do we fit more to please the eye alone? When insisting more is best is it just an expensive way to keep the VAS clean. Think about this. If true you did a very bad thing. A capacitance multiplier would only loose 3 V maximum ( VAS feed ). It's residuals are almost sine wave and not saw tooth. To loose 3 V also gives delightful clipping performance. If the ripple doesn't reach down to that level then the amp will be clean. The dumpers will act as regulators. Not only that they are fast ones.
Electronic Components/Capacitors/Electrolytic Capacitors/Radial Electrolytic Capacitors | Rapid Online
On large caps and German style amps - I am reasonably well acquainted with German audio, not an expert, but I know a thing or two. If you refer to the general filter caps for the whole amp, I'd say the Germans are stingy, typical Japanese amps had more capacitance, but lacked the silicon to do well into 4 Ohms.
If you refer to VAS and IPS decoupling, I think they were no better or worse than the others. In their newer amps, H/K for example uses 47 Ohms shunted by 470...1,000 uF. I haven't seen many using more than 1,000 uF, after all, the voltage amplifying section of the amp uses 40 mA at most in typical cases.
My view, as you know, is to keep that section of the amp fed by "virtual battery" stabilization, by default around 5V above the current stages. The drawback of this appraoch is its expense and real estate it requires, and everything else are just benefits. This allows you to use lower PSU lines for the current stages, thus keeping them to the left of their SOAR curves, as you don't need to worry about voltage drops across transistors. Whatever the current part is drawing at any time is not seen by the voltage section. The voltage fed to the IPS and VAS is by default much better filtered and is more noise free, since every stabilizer theoretically acts as a filter as well; making it be just that is a part of your own prowess. The net result is a very steady and unshifting stereo sound "picture".
As for the current amp feed, there is a lne over which you gain less and less. However, what hould be fitted is, in my view, determined by what you want coming out and into what. As a general rule, assume the very worst case, say 4 Ohms with a -60 degree phase shift, meaning twice the current. Assume 1 Joule of energy per every 10W of dissipated power, and wrok it out.
I realize this is no science but simple assumptions, however they have never failed me yet. If my PSU voltage to the current section is say 50V at full power on, I will be requiring 20 Joules of energy for my above condition, preferably with a bit of resreve; hence, I should use 20,000 uF per supply line, or a total of 80,000 uF for a stereo amp.
If you refer to VAS and IPS decoupling, I think they were no better or worse than the others. In their newer amps, H/K for example uses 47 Ohms shunted by 470...1,000 uF. I haven't seen many using more than 1,000 uF, after all, the voltage amplifying section of the amp uses 40 mA at most in typical cases.
My view, as you know, is to keep that section of the amp fed by "virtual battery" stabilization, by default around 5V above the current stages. The drawback of this appraoch is its expense and real estate it requires, and everything else are just benefits. This allows you to use lower PSU lines for the current stages, thus keeping them to the left of their SOAR curves, as you don't need to worry about voltage drops across transistors. Whatever the current part is drawing at any time is not seen by the voltage section. The voltage fed to the IPS and VAS is by default much better filtered and is more noise free, since every stabilizer theoretically acts as a filter as well; making it be just that is a part of your own prowess. The net result is a very steady and unshifting stereo sound "picture".
As for the current amp feed, there is a lne over which you gain less and less. However, what hould be fitted is, in my view, determined by what you want coming out and into what. As a general rule, assume the very worst case, say 4 Ohms with a -60 degree phase shift, meaning twice the current. Assume 1 Joule of energy per every 10W of dissipated power, and wrok it out.
I realize this is no science but simple assumptions, however they have never failed me yet. If my PSU voltage to the current section is say 50V at full power on, I will be requiring 20 Joules of energy for my above condition, preferably with a bit of resreve; hence, I should use 20,000 uF per supply line, or a total of 80,000 uF for a stereo amp.
I am sorry to barge in. I am learning a lot from reading all your posts. Thank you for that.
Regarding the operating systems, you could instal VMware and create a virtual 32 Bit XP installation and run it from within your new operating system. Or you can also create a new partition on your drive and instal XP on the partition. You will end up with a dual boot option. And as your machine boots up, you will be given the option to get in either one or the other op system. There is a 3rd option but it does not work that well, and it is called the XP mode.
Just a thought.
Most of the time the 32 bits XP compatibility mode is enough inside your Seven or W8 . WMWare can be a lttle time consuming for a non specialist : the same when you read this thread and not a specialist of electronic like I am
Well, what about the choice of a unique big 20 k Uf main cap for both filtering and energy tank like Accuphase do ?
Niguel : the 2200 uF caps has to be put near the output transistors or for each transistor stages (instead of 200 uf in a middle line amp as a NAD e.g.) after the huge F&T caps (these last after the diodes bridge I assume).
Pi filtering technic are gived up those days ?
Sorry for two cents...
. WMWare can be a lttle time consuming for a non specialist : the same when you read this thread and not a specialist of electronic like I am Well, what about the choice of a unique big 20 k Uf main cap for both filtering and energy tank like Accuphase do ?
Niguel : the 2200 uF caps has to be put near the output transistors or for each transistor stages (instead of 200 uf in a middle line amp as a NAD e.g.) after the huge F&T caps (these last after the diodes bridge I assume).
Pi filtering technic are gived up those days ?
Sorry for two cents...
I am sorry to barge in. I am learning a lot from reading all your posts. Thank you for that.
Regarding the operating systems, you could instal VMware and create a virtual 32 Bit XP installation and run it from within your new operating system. Or you can also create a new partition on your drive and instal XP on the partition. You will end up with a dual boot option. And as your machine boots up, you will be given the option to get in either one or the other op system. There is a 3rd option but it does not work that well, and it is called the XP mode.
Just a thought.
I will pass that on to my son. Sort of thing he usually would have tried. See if he will write a bit on it.
Anyone know of a synchronized SMPS and Class D amp. I am told Pro Audio does it that way to get maximum efficiency and better power factor. I don't mind if switching frequency is reduced as it is sub woofer work.
Most of the time the 32 bits XP compatibility mode is enough inside your Seven or W8
Well, what about the choice of a unique big 20 k Uf main cap for both filtering and energy tank like Accuphase do ?
Niguel : the 2200 uF caps has to be put near the output transistors or for each transistor stages (instead of 200 uf in a middle line amp as a NAD e.g.) after the huge F&T caps (these last after the diodes bridge I assume).
Pi filtering technic are gived up those days ?
Sorry for two cents...
Yes. I think Demian said it ( 1 st Audio ). If the main capacitors are domestic grade and the decoupling caps high grade ( next to output transistor) you get free of charge a Pi filter. The nasty inductance from the stages before the decouplers is now our friend. I always did this. It was intuitive and I never though of this exact reason. If this conjecture is right using high grade capacitors in the primary position might be worse.
I think Niguel is even better name than my many names ( I was born on Miguel's Mass) . Last Night I was Mr Black Island after Isla Negra wine. My name is from the same route as some French monks mistook the origins of the name when the name first appeared. How anyone has the nerve to say that I don't know. It should always be said " as best we know". We none of us were there. That goes for how the Earth and Moon formed. A few years ago no one knew and now it is " fact ".
If playing mind games, then I could conclude that somebody down Nigel's line of ancestors loved pears, in which case his family name, translated into Sebian would be "Krushkich", or "Kruškić" in latin spelling and "Крушкић" in cyrillic spelling.
Joking aside, such a family name does actually exist, so Nige, you may have relatives here even if you don't know it.
Just like my family name, Veselinović, loosely translated means the offspring of a very joyful or joyous man, turned into English, that would be "Joyson".
Joking aside, such a family name does actually exist, so Nige, you may have relatives here even if you don't know it.
Just like my family name, Veselinović, loosely translated means the offspring of a very joyful or joyous man, turned into English, that would be "Joyson".
Dejan I am listening at about 105 dB to Beatles Abbey road via that pile of junk Linn LP12. Love that Denon DL110. I only know it is about 105 dB as I left the door open walking Colleen to her Beetle. She said " you don't give a stuff do you ". Colleen who "can not hear differences " tried TD145 DL110 v LP12 EKOS DL110. I was nervous as I thought the TD 145 could win. I was deluded. It's too weird for words to hear that differences. Like it was a different studio and different recorder. Thorens, speaker A speaker B. LP12 a spread with no real speakers if eyes closed. As I had rejected the LP12 it is time get myself a better turntable. I must also build DL 110 a bespoke preamp. All Colleen did was point the finger at the LP12 and say " that one ". The really weird bit is no two turntables can be so alike that sound so different. Lets be clear both are superb.
Pear-son is a bad corruption of Peter-son. The monks and scribes were as dyslexic as me.
Pear-son is a bad corruption of Peter-son. The monks and scribes were as dyslexic as me.
Perhaps most monks are, but some them spent a few centuries developing elixirs of life, such the Cointreau, so I forgive them.
However, if originally Peterson, then the local version would be a very popular familiy name "Petrović", or "Петровић".
As for power amps, you'll see, you'll come around to one of my models. Just you wait and see.
However, if originally Peterson, then the local version would be a very popular familiy name "Petrović", or "Петровић".
As for power amps, you'll see, you'll come around to one of my models.
Just you wait and see.- Status
- Not open for further replies.