Hook was found to be caused by the dielectric characteristic known as Dielectric Absorption (DA).
You can also find it here --- http://www.analog.com/library/analogdialogue/archives/43-09/EDch 12 pc issues.pdf
As an invited guest presenter at professional IEEE conference in San Jose, calif. many years ago, I replied to F.Toole ( sitting in front row) in the answer and question session -- he said the DA waveform I showed could be looked at with an FFT.
Not in the presentation - but I said I had done that also using a LeCroy digital scope with its FFT and found that 2H was dominant with DA. That bit of info has never been published... as so much never does.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Funny. Call it "dielectric absorption" and audiophiles run screaming in fear.
However take a bunch of RC networks in series, which is precisely how you model dielectric absorption, call it "Multipole Technology," name your cable company MIT and audiophiles will just lap it up and ask for more.
This industry is a complete joke.
se
From the very article you cite:
As shown in Figure 12.17, the RC model for this effective capacitance ranges from 0.1 pF to 2.0 pF, with the resistance ranging from 50 MΩ to 500 MΩ. Values of 0.5 pF and 100 MΩ are most common. Consequently, circuit-board DA interacts most strongly with high impedance circuits.
How come no one else seems to see this nonliearity you speak of?
se
As shown in Figure 12.17, the RC model for this effective capacitance ranges from 0.1 pF to 2.0 pF, with the resistance ranging from 50 MΩ to 500 MΩ. Values of 0.5 pF and 100 MΩ are most common. Consequently, circuit-board DA interacts most strongly with high impedance circuits.
How come no one else seems to see this nonliearity you speak of?
se
I was surprised and interested when I first read that article on circuit 'hook'. Of course, Tektronix needed inputs like this to do an accurate job in making their attenuators. We had just moved to FR-3 at that time and thought is was the best that was necessary. This Tek article showed us that we still had to be careful. Even FR-4 is problematic, much of the time, so the Vendetta Research boards were made of a better material, and the CTC Blowtorch used reinforced Teflon circuit boards (can't be too careful). '-)
Attention to detail is what separates the typical from the special.
SE can use paper if he wants, but I don't need to hear about it.
Attention to detail is what separates the typical from the special.
SE can use paper if he wants, but I don't need to hear about it.
Each industry has their problems with components and substrates. The Phenolic material is much better for RF, but tends to warp. It also does not tolerate heat very well (no kidding!) and tends to release its grip on the copper layer easily. However, short of using Teflon PCBs, a Phenolic PCB might be better than FR4 in your CD player RF section. So don't knock something before giving it some thought.
I have not found a source for Teflon PCB material in Canada yet that will sell smaller quantities. I have some RF circuitry that might benefit. I would rather that than use Phenolic material due to heat. Otherwise Phenolic would have been a valid choice.
I imagine that a couple of Japanese phono amplifier designs might work better with a Teflon base PCB material. If I find some, there would be motivation to rebuild my Marantz SC-9 phono amp on this material.
-Chris
I have not found a source for Teflon PCB material in Canada yet that will sell smaller quantities. I have some RF circuitry that might benefit. I would rather that than use Phenolic material due to heat. Otherwise Phenolic would have been a valid choice.
I imagine that a couple of Japanese phono amplifier designs might work better with a Teflon base PCB material. If I find some, there would be motivation to rebuild my Marantz SC-9 phono amp on this material.
-Chris
I showed the data and how I did it at IEEE conference. It is published there as conference proceedings. Gee. You must have missed it I would guess (and a lot of other things it seems).
The pcb Cda value is much smaller.... I used a 1.0 mfd capacitor in my tests because it is a value used in audio.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Just to move away from ByBee as no one can measure it as I would do it do nor has removed any other parts - like a C, to see if it is the Bybee part or the C filtering which is being heard......... let me inject here something about jitter in ADC/DAC systems.
I have an old and not expensive (IMO) Sony DVP- CX985V player.... which if I hear an improvment with HD downloads against it, it may be like comparing a 741 opamp to today's best. And, if someone doesnt hear this or that in their player... doesnt mean others have as good a player.
View attachment C2 and ripping.pdf
Robert Harley of Stereophile is used to listening and learning about the very best equipment..... in his CD equipment used for music he doesnt think the data error system in CD players makes any difference audibly. But, does that apply to a $250 Bose CD changer as well or an older low-mid price player?
View attachment RH C2 error detection.pdf
And, BenchMark's user manual ( yes, the ADC 1 has arrived) talks a lot about how important jitter is and that the whole system - including recording and playback interfaces - adds jitter in many ways/places..... with consequences in the midrange of audio and higher.
View attachment Jitter ADC 1 USB.pdf
I would not be surprised to learn many low-med price CD players have a lot of jitter intrinsically but also increased when hooked up to a complete music system. Maybe some high priced ones also.
THx-RNMarsh
I have an old and not expensive (IMO) Sony DVP- CX985V player.... which if I hear an improvment with HD downloads against it, it may be like comparing a 741 opamp to today's best. And, if someone doesnt hear this or that in their player... doesnt mean others have as good a player.
View attachment C2 and ripping.pdf
Robert Harley of Stereophile is used to listening and learning about the very best equipment..... in his CD equipment used for music he doesnt think the data error system in CD players makes any difference audibly. But, does that apply to a $250 Bose CD changer as well or an older low-mid price player?
View attachment RH C2 error detection.pdf
And, BenchMark's user manual ( yes, the ADC 1 has arrived) talks a lot about how important jitter is and that the whole system - including recording and playback interfaces - adds jitter in many ways/places..... with consequences in the midrange of audio and higher.
View attachment Jitter ADC 1 USB.pdf
I would not be surprised to learn many low-med price CD players have a lot of jitter intrinsically but also increased when hooked up to a complete music system. Maybe some high priced ones also.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
SY would know but I recall teflon being subject to cold flow, making it problematic. Probably some formulations/composites address that issue.
But short of all material being low loss, certain high-Z circuit nodes can be isolated with the parts connected to teflon standoffs. At low impedances, really no point to it.
But short of all material being low loss, certain high-Z circuit nodes can be isolated with the parts connected to teflon standoffs. At low impedances, really no point to it.
One thing is fer sure with digital.... it is a mine field to navigate successfully...... dither on or off and when and how often to use it and DAW softare settings, error detection and correction.... growing over time in sophisication and jitter at every turn. What next?
THx-RNMarsh
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Eh, he planted the usual comment promoting his friend scam product...sycophant or wot Frank
We have been here before, there is nothing wrong with FR4 you are out of date I have put plenty of information up regarding this.... Up to low GHz one of the MANY types of FR$ can be used.
Well thanks to the overconsumption of espresso and a dessert (rare) I got home from a two-hour reggae set to do the simulation "experiment": the input stage of transistors replaced with ideal transconductances with high input Z and high output Z, driving the rest of the works. Same standing current, same "emitter" resistors and tail currents. So no means of distortion production in that input section.
Now the performance is completely feedback Z invariant, and the distortion is very nearly the same as it was with the low impedance network and "real" parts. I conclude that the overwhelming majority of the overall distortion arises in the two second-stage devices. And with a real input stage, as I had conjectured, the change is mainly associated with a little more loop gain for the low-Z FB case.
I forgot to mention in my previous post that Siemens offers 10 or 12 power line filters, very similar to mine, but mine are done a bit better and cost about 1/3 of their price. Nobody has any copyrights because the principle used has been around since 1930 or so, tried and tested many times.
The point being that if they have a whole line of them, then somebody must be bying them, and if memory serves, they have had such products since before 2000.
All this has nothing to do with Bybees, of course, no magic, no glitz, no quantums of any kind used except when calculating their price.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.