John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know who those 'many' would be, I haven't met them. ...

Yes you have, you just don't know it. Me, for example.

I've been let down by High End electronics so many times I stopped counting. Way more times than being enchanted by it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying High End is a swindle (although I would say that for some samples), it's just that what I heard for enormous amounts of money was obtainable for a lot less money, althought not in equally sexy, 20 kg aluminium cases and without a famous name attached to it. No obvious nasties, but no special sound either (mostly).

Of course, much of this is very personal, dictated by my taste. And I am of the neutral school, meaning that I expect an audio device to be "not there", to be neutral to the point of vanishing from view and hearing as such.

What I count as my probably greatest blessing, my speakers, which are extremely neutral and ironed out (40-18,000 Hz +/- 1.5 dB, L-R equal to within +/- 0.5 dB, extremely easy load to drive) is truly a blessing, but is also mercielss in showing up existing faults.

A random example - Accuphase 206 integrated amp. It's very well built to very high standards, even impressive, it does nothing wrong and it has a lot more power than adverstised in real life. Yet, it's somehow not quite focused, sounds just a bit blurred, and in my view, tends to be rather two dimensional, it has width, it has heigth, but it lacks depth of the soundstage. It was with me for two weeks, so the random factor of current personal feeling was bypassed, I always make sure of that.

You can buy that kind of sound for about a quarter of its price elsewhere. I cannot say it was poor, or that it let me down severly, it just didn't manage what it was said it would manage.

I agree with the other parts of your post, though.
 
Define current and past mid-level, fact is i dont see that , hi-end has improved, but is fractionally better than it was 20 yrs, ago. Reference level 20 yrs ago would be no slouch vs today.

What is considered mid-fi today ... ?

Good point.

My personal answer is that what sounded good in 1978 still sounds good today, just not as stand out good as it did then. Or not usually.

I agree with Vacuphile's and your arguments that the gap between your averaged moder High End and Mid Fi has narrowed. Finding a poorly sounding amp today is a chore, you really have to try hard. On the other hand, they are still below par of what was great stuff in 1978.

In my case, that's why I still have the Marantz 170 DC power amp. By current standards, it is no longer exceptional except in one aspect - it still delivers everything, from top to bottom, in one seamless whole few can match. It does so at the expense of perhaps skipping too lightly over some fine detail, but the amount of musical satisfaction it delivers is still way above average.
 
Bonsai,

You need a lot to silence my good friend Jan. This is my latest atempt :p.

jan.jpg
 

Attachments

  • jan.jpg
    jan.jpg
    161.7 KB · Views: 217
Gerhard, all other things being equal, thicker is better simply because thicker allows for less stray capacitance.

Of course, we are talking only abut the the foundation, poor layout will still create problems no matter what you use.

For the last 25 years, I have NEVER used any other but German made glass epoxy boards, and my PCB service man hasn't bought any other. I'm happy with them and have no incentive to change.

My soldering irons, both standalone, battery powered and soldering station are all by ERSA, always have been since 1971 to this day. And I do not save on tips, I have a fine selection for various purposes and I do change them when they eventually wear out.

China was mentioned only in ontext of reported but not verified appearence of 255 micron copper tracing. Try working with that if you are a maschist or have no choice, because as Richard says, they tend to come off real easy. But they probably do use it as they are extremely cost-conscious and are always looking for ways to drop the price.

You can get a wide range of copper weights, from 9microns up, on plated through boards the base copper weight will be increased roughly by the amount of plating down the holes. if you are worried about de-soldering specify a higher Tg rated base laminate.
All the information you can want regarding PCBs and PCB assembly can be found in IPC specification, also ALL PCB manufacturers will work to these specifications even if you don't. My PCB manufacturing instructions are attached, that list most of the relevant specs for all aspects of PCB manufacturing from base laminates to surface finish.
The IPC also have lots of research material covering all aspects of PCB design and re-work (As do NASA and NPL; national physics lab), also there is a lot of info on re-work again from these organisations.

Consumer products these days due to Lead free tend to use better quality FR4 because of RoHS, though for a lot of todays throw away devices they will cur the cost as much as possible, and a lot of items are not even considered for repair so using a lesser quality (in terms of temperature cycles) material is not realy detrimental to the product until you try and repair/de-solder something.
 

Attachments

  • PCB manufacturing instructions Class 3 Generic.doc
    84 KB · Views: 72
Last edited:
Everyone knows that since ice is an expanded form of water that when the polar glaciers melt the sea level should go down! :D :cheers: :film:@ 11:00


"Everyone knows that since ice is an expanded form of water that when the polar glaciers melt the sea level should go down! "

Unfortunately only true if there is no land-mass underneath (e.g. North Pole).

If the ice is on terra firma and then melts, the melt water will add to ocean depth.

As I recall, ice that is floating will not raise sea level when it melts.

Ice which is supported from beneath will raise sea level when it melts.

jn
 
Ask yourself how many will immediately see/understand that.

Sigh... My answer to that question, I do not like..

I could not believe it when the news about that big floating ice mass and how high sea level would rise when it melted...:confused::confused:

It's already floating! Sea level will not rise any further once it's floating.

Should somebody be yelling eureka right about now??

jn
 
www.hifisonix.com
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Sigh... My answer to that question, I do not like..

I could not believe it when the news about that big floating ice mass and how high sea level would rise when it melted...:confused::confused:

It's already floating! Sea level will not rise any further once it's floating.

Should somebody be yelling eureka right about now??

jn


It's the ice sheets of Greenland and Antartica that are the concern . . . Not the ice sheets of the Arctic.
 
One of the best thing about true knowledge is that it protects you from danger. It is unfortunate that our culture nowadays does not want to or know how to check facts, despite our fury whenever we get scammed or used in any way. You could say we have forgotten how to KNOW, or maybe we haven't really figured it out yet, which would explain why we are the way we are.
 
One of the best thing about true knowledge is that it protects you from danger. It is unfortunate that our culture nowadays does not want to or know how to check facts, despite our fury whenever we get scammed or used in any way. You could say we have forgotten how to KNOW, or maybe we haven't really figured it out yet, which would explain why we are the way we are.

Nothing really changes , its the same regardless of time ....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.