I would suggest the Basis "Work of Art" turntable, which will
leave you enough left over for a car.
Hi Andre,
I like using Canare wire personally. It has the added advantage of being very flexible.
-Chris
Right there you have zeroed in on why many designers who have technical knowledge don't seem to hear a difference. They pre-qualify which cables to compare, since it doesn't make any sense at all to compare a cable ill-suited for the task. Not only that, but I'll bet they make their cables only as long as they need to be. You may require longer cables of a couple meters in order to show differences.
I like using Canare wire personally. It has the added advantage of being very flexible.
I'm sure you'll agree it is simply a matter of using a cable assembly that affects the signal the least - while keeping prices within the realm of reality.
-Chris
Thanks SY, I am aware of these resonances. They ocur mostly for MM and perhaps for high output MCs. The Benz Micro Wood SL that I am currently using has very high resonances (only a few uH inductance).
The problem was the inability to reproduce any frequency response within 0.1dB. Obviously, no resonances were encountered up to 100KHz.
Hi Joshua,
While it is very true that the higher harmonics do seem to be picked up more easily than low order harmonics, singling out the 7th might be too optimistic. Yeah, I know John likes to look at this number, but you can't isolate one harmonic. You must look at all of them. You'll generally find that the absolute level of the 7th harmonic is related to all of them in the series. They all vary as each other in the higher harmonics. Looking at several spectrum "pictures", it can be seen that the 7th may be of a higher amplitude than it's neighbors, but you also have to look at the actually frequencies of these harmonics. For instance, if someone can hear to about 16 KHz, the 7th harmonic is only important to about 2.3 KHz for that person. For a claimed normal of 20 KHz in a younger child / teenager, you can move that up to about 2,860 Hz. The ability to hear problems diminishes rapidly after that, especially since these harmonics are very low in level.
Zeroing in on one specific factor (like the 7th harmonic) posses a very real risk of missing the more important measurements. You need to look at the entire picture in order to come to a valid answer. Note: John, I am in no way "attacking" your interest in the 7th harmonic. I am specifically answering Joshua's post. I am more than certain you know what and how to measure audio equipment.
In truth, you should listen to all well designed, well made equipment in your price range. For example, Nelson Pass has designed commercially successful equipment that are different in the most fundamental ways. To do anything else is simply to restrict your choices, but then that is your problem.
For example, I've had poor luck with every single Ford I have ever bought. I've had three now, and each was a disaster in it's own little way. All suffering from poor quality. However, I'll still at least look at them and test drive. You know what their slogan is? Have you driven a Ford, lately? They say this about every 8 years and haven't really changed.
See above.
-Chris
This is going to depend a great deal as to the resources one can bring to bear on the test. As I recall, you had said that for most, if not all of your career, you had to get by with minimal equipment and supplies. Your ability to measure would therefore be considerably limited compared to most good audio service centers I have seen. That makes your comment true and accurate for your situation. Certainly, more well equipped technicians would have the ability to "see more". Moreover, some people can look at a schematic, see the construction and have a pretty good idea what an amp may sound like. Not every time, but certainly noticeable and better than guessing. Even I can do this occasionally. I'm sure that a person such as John (Curl) with his experience also has this skill. I'll extend that list of people to most who design amplifiers and post here.
That really depends on signals, coupled with the transducers used and how quiet the listening area is. Like everything, there is a fair range on these numbers.
While it is very true that the higher harmonics do seem to be picked up more easily than low order harmonics, singling out the 7th might be too optimistic. Yeah, I know John likes to look at this number, but you can't isolate one harmonic. You must look at all of them. You'll generally find that the absolute level of the 7th harmonic is related to all of them in the series. They all vary as each other in the higher harmonics. Looking at several spectrum "pictures", it can be seen that the 7th may be of a higher amplitude than it's neighbors, but you also have to look at the actually frequencies of these harmonics. For instance, if someone can hear to about 16 KHz, the 7th harmonic is only important to about 2.3 KHz for that person. For a claimed normal of 20 KHz in a younger child / teenager, you can move that up to about 2,860 Hz. The ability to hear problems diminishes rapidly after that, especially since these harmonics are very low in level.
Zeroing in on one specific factor (like the 7th harmonic) posses a very real risk of missing the more important measurements. You need to look at the entire picture in order to come to a valid answer. Note: John, I am in no way "attacking" your interest in the 7th harmonic. I am specifically answering Joshua's post. I am more than certain you know what and how to measure audio equipment.
Well, of course! Those numbers in isolation have reduced relevance. I will bet that the amp measuring 80 X less THD has had some care in it's design. That's assuming you don't do something silly like compare a tube amp to a solid state amp on THD specs alone. Now that is a pretty meaningless exercise if you ask me!
Two reasons for that. You will only see things published that the marketing guys want you to see. Also, as you multiply the specs you want to publish, you become responsible for more acceptance testing in production. Plus, you also force all your service depots to both buy more test equipment (and more expensive types) and spend more time testing to verify service which will all be passed on to the end user. Always remember that the end user pays for everything - including losses. If they don't, the business in question is out of business.
Well, again it depends on the technology used in the amplifier, and what specifications you are looking at. However, some specs can give you an idea on sound quality, along with the brand name (that's part of the spec too). Specifications are not useless and are most often used to determine if the product is in fact operating within normal specifications. So these are highly beneficial to the end user in supporting any claims that the equipment is substandard. Most defects will affect the measured performance.
Exactly my point. How much has to do with the effects of advertising, brand expectations and price point? Add to this, possible interactions with the loudspeakers? Often, any amplifier that can drive the silliest speaker loads are well regarded, and for no other reason than that. Ohm speakers and several others come to mind that have very low impedances at some frequencies at least. Infinity produced some evil designs that became popular for this reason alone.
That's more than fair, and acceptable at the higher price points. Not doable for mass market types.
Self fulfilling prophesy now.
In truth, you should listen to all well designed, well made equipment in your price range. For example, Nelson Pass has designed commercially successful equipment that are different in the most fundamental ways. To do anything else is simply to restrict your choices, but then that is your problem.
For example, I've had poor luck with every single Ford I have ever bought. I've had three now, and each was a disaster in it's own little way. All suffering from poor quality. However, I'll still at least look at them and test drive. You know what their slogan is? Have you driven a Ford, lately? They say this about every 8 years and haven't really changed.
Self fulfilling prophesy now.
See above.
All he needs are good people on staff to listen. The designer could be deaf for all I care. It's a non-issue. Believe me when I say that if his stuff doesn't sound good, it doesn't sell. Change or die.
That whole idea is really odd coming from you. Start at the recommended loading and experiment from there. If you can't determine what the best load is, put it to the published "happy spot".
You really have to know that transformers for this are going to be more than just a little problematic. Loads are reflected both ways with the transformer's character thrown in for good measure. You can't divorce the input circuit of the preamp from the transformer settings at all. Have fun with that! But I guess as long as you like the sound you're getting, mission accomplished.
-Chris
And I was told about somebody complaining in this thread about 'cheap shots'.
Enjoy the beer!
No electrical resonances, depending on the resistive loading. Exactly, I was unable to separate resonances (if any) from experimental errors.
Does the context allow for "who"? Why do you choose to deride me? Because I'm a beginner? If it doesn't look good on John, it won't look good on you either. For your own good, show some class dude; it takes more than apply formulas to be a decent man.
You were talking about resonances that you were trying to measure separately from errors. I quoted that. Obvious context.
You said it clearly that you could not measure those resonances reliably. So I asked, could you hear a difference?
What can you expect? You haven't described your experimental setup in any detail.
You were talking about resonances that you were trying to measure separately from errors. I quoted that. Obvious context.
You said it clearly that you could not measure those resonances reliably. So I asked, could you hear a difference?
What can you expect? You haven't described your experimental setup in any detail.
If you "hear" anything that is not deemed measurable, "class" is something that is rarely shown. Not sure why. I guess some feel that the "listeners" will evaporate into the ether if deriding and demeaning comments are given to your "listening" questions. I wonder if it is because ignorance is bliss? It is a sad way to communicate, but does seem to be a common response to these types of questions.
I could say that the designers just do not want to be biased about their own designs, but this stance is never stated.
For a beginner, you certainly got some nerve.
But anyways, I'll skip the rants and try again to understand your question. Given the circumstances, I fail to understand how a positive or negative answer to your question would provide you with any information. Moreover, if I would say no, the next reply would infer I am stone deaf. If I would say yes, the next reply would be "so there are audible differences that you were unable to measure" which is obviously a logical fallacy. BTW, you haven't asked anything about the experimental setup.
Anyway, you'd be better asking such questions Joshua_G, Curly or anybody else in the team you seem to enjoy. They'll be happy to provide an answer, and you'll get the warm feeling of belonging to a skilled community of designers, endorsed by personalities in the audio industry.
I have already spent to many electrons here, so a few more won't harm. As a participant to a public forum, you should know that nobody owns you anything here, not even an answer.
I think the question of resonance is pertinent. Most MCs I've tested have pretty high Q ultrasonic resonances of mechanical origin. Where the pole from the loading occurs with respect to the resonance (and possibly some effect from electromechanical damping) would seem to have measurable and possibly audible consequences. Why is that such a ridiculous notion?
BTW, here's a trick- most test records with a square wave have wiggles from the cutter resonance. To determine if the wiggles you see are from the cutter or your cartridge, change the tt speed to 45 and see if the resonance frequency changes.
BTW, here's a trick- most test records with a square wave have wiggles from the cutter resonance. To determine if the wiggles you see are from the cutter or your cartridge, change the tt speed to 45 and see if the resonance frequency changes.
Yes, I have noticed such mechanical resonances and indeed they are quite sharp (although barely in the audio band, nothing significant under 30KHz). However, they were not affected by changes in the resistive loading (>100ohm), at least not more than the experimental errors. These resonances are certainly not electrical, since they are barely affected (frequency wise) by a change (0-200pF) in the loading capacitance. BTW, for the Benz Micro Wood, 100ohm is the recommended (by the manufacturer) load.
Never thought about, I'll check what you suggested, first chance when I'll redo the setup.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.