Coulomb said:
Do you find hiding the ugly *** speakers in a pandimonium of chaos somehow distracts the eye from the fact that the speakers are still nude??
Maybe you think that veneer will color the sound? Come on Dude dress your speakers!!
BTW. How do they sound?
Regards
Anthony
You did catch his window AC unit in the pic didn't you. Poor Urich alas...
lumanauw said:
This is a reasonable description, but has three issues I can
think of:
1) Common Gate/Base amplification can actually be used as
a gain stage (I did a nice moving coil stage and I/V converter
with this approach). Ordinarily I don't consider cascoding
as a gain stage, but these provide illustrations of exceptions.
2) I think you could argue that a level shifter without gain
is not a gain stage, just as you could argue that a folded cascode
is still a coasocde. In this case, the level shifter could look like
an ordinary VAS, but it's degeneration would be such that it
had unit gain, like a current mirror.
3) And speaking of current mirrors, in which category are we
placing them?
So I think you end up looking at this on a case by case basis,
and the simplest criterion is "does it contribute substantial
gain?"
To my way of thinking, the whole "how many gain stages does it have" question is a dead end. Given that even passive components have an effect on sound quality, I tend to regard all parts as guilty until proven innocent whether they provide gain (voltage or current) or not.
For the last year or two I have been approaching things from the viewpoint of how many components I can get by without, whether passive or active. As a separate but related point, I am experimenting with the idea of using passives in place of solid state actives whenever possible. Tubes already tend to enforce a minimalist attitude just by their limitations, thereby turning a weakness into a strength.
So far, results are quite enlightening. Image width and depth...long regarded as one of the no-brainer, duh-use-tubes-you-idiot issues, have responded particularly well.
Don't get me wrong, I still love tubes, but the price and availability issues drive me nuts.
Obviously, topology figures heavily into the equation, as does parts quality. For instance, I got rather forcibly reminded about the sound quality difference between caps about two weeks ago when I replaced a currently available, well-regarded film cap used by many (including myself) with a 20 year-old Wonder Cap. The Wonder Cap was better by a country mile. Uh oh. I'm still mulling over what to do about this, because the substitution of a single part caused a complete remake of the sound quality, yet decent capacitors are horrendously expensive.
Grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter...
I mean, this is the kind of thing that would drop, say, a four star component down to a two star component in magazine parlance. Just the substitution of one damned part. Grrrr... Grrrr...
I do not want to undertake a full survey of the capacitor market right now, but it looks as though I may be forced to do so whether I'm in the mood for it or not. Lawsy, lawsy, this is gonna get expensive.
Granted, I could have used an active device--actually two would have been the "standard" thing to do--but then I'm not only putting a half dozen or more parts into the circuit, I'm also changing the topology into something more complicated, a route I am loath to follow, especially since the current circuit shows such promise once good components are put into play.
Grey
For the last year or two I have been approaching things from the viewpoint of how many components I can get by without, whether passive or active. As a separate but related point, I am experimenting with the idea of using passives in place of solid state actives whenever possible. Tubes already tend to enforce a minimalist attitude just by their limitations, thereby turning a weakness into a strength.
So far, results are quite enlightening. Image width and depth...long regarded as one of the no-brainer, duh-use-tubes-you-idiot issues, have responded particularly well.
Don't get me wrong, I still love tubes, but the price and availability issues drive me nuts.
Obviously, topology figures heavily into the equation, as does parts quality. For instance, I got rather forcibly reminded about the sound quality difference between caps about two weeks ago when I replaced a currently available, well-regarded film cap used by many (including myself) with a 20 year-old Wonder Cap. The Wonder Cap was better by a country mile. Uh oh. I'm still mulling over what to do about this, because the substitution of a single part caused a complete remake of the sound quality, yet decent capacitors are horrendously expensive.
Grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter...
I mean, this is the kind of thing that would drop, say, a four star component down to a two star component in magazine parlance. Just the substitution of one damned part. Grrrr... Grrrr...
I do not want to undertake a full survey of the capacitor market right now, but it looks as though I may be forced to do so whether I'm in the mood for it or not. Lawsy, lawsy, this is gonna get expensive.
Granted, I could have used an active device--actually two would have been the "standard" thing to do--but then I'm not only putting a half dozen or more parts into the circuit, I'm also changing the topology into something more complicated, a route I am loath to follow, especially since the current circuit shows such promise once good components are put into play.
Grey
Certainly not me to argue for those 3 issues
I notice a thing. Audio amplification with big multiplication device (like audio, very small signal, passing to base of big HFE bipolar, and in the collector resulting in big output) does not sound as relaxed as a device with small multiplication device (needs bigger input for the same output, like Jfet or Mosfet).
The simplicity of transfer function maybe plays important role here. Signal passing to base/gate will have more complex transfer function than signal passing through cascode (not via base/gate). I notice how complex it is the relation of Vbe and Ic in Bipolar equation (Boltzman?)
Mr. Pass,
Is it possible to make an audio amplifier with audio signal do not enter base/gate at all? All transistors are used like common base/cascode way, signal is passing only through collector/emmitor, but never via base. Is it possible to make audio amp with this configuration? I cannot figure how to do it. Is it impossible?
I notice a thing. Audio amplification with big multiplication device (like audio, very small signal, passing to base of big HFE bipolar, and in the collector resulting in big output) does not sound as relaxed as a device with small multiplication device (needs bigger input for the same output, like Jfet or Mosfet).
The simplicity of transfer function maybe plays important role here. Signal passing to base/gate will have more complex transfer function than signal passing through cascode (not via base/gate). I notice how complex it is the relation of Vbe and Ic in Bipolar equation (Boltzman?)
Mr. Pass,
Is it possible to make an audio amplifier with audio signal do not enter base/gate at all? All transistors are used like common base/cascode way, signal is passing only through collector/emmitor, but never via base. Is it possible to make audio amp with this configuration? I cannot figure how to do it. Is it impossible?
It would be amusing if she were starting an audio business
A spy! a Spy! Welll. I have to agree the trip to Pass Central seems less urgent now.........
Then again if Nelson actually remakes my amp someday I can't see how I can stay away! See Nelson, I'm not easy!!
Making good progress on my SOX - the trouble with being an architect is that you want it to come out looking cool. I'm tryin' but nothin's happening! Kinda looks like a highrise building mated with an SET tube amp at the moment....