While you didn't design anything that can be produced and sold on a commercial basis.
And perhaps that focus (on an end product) is why he has been successful when so many have not?
Having said that I do agree with your last thought far more than you will ever know!
My measure equipment is for service appliacations only, not enough resolution.
Maybe the 7th is the problem makes unconfortable to listen music.
But the big sonic difference is the bass. The small amp is vivid, alive and kicking with a tiny 150 Watt power supply, while the big one has 1200 W Power supply, can deliver 10 times more current, but the bass is still shy and uniform.
The importer modified with his negative output impedance trick he uses in his own brand *Rowen*, now i just hear the bass going somewaht lower, but the problem is not gone.
So i think the big one has a design problem, making very good tech specs. , but the sound is crap.
What you are doing right?
Good topology, careful with details, lots of experience, matched silicon devices, no unnecessary parts and circuits, short path, lesser solder joints (good lay out), good shielding and very good grounding toplogy, power supply quality,global feedback only when usefull and very important , the listening test. Did i forget something?
But of course, Mr. Pass, Mr Hansen and some others are also on the right track, imho.
The only negative aspect i found is: Your products are a pain in the *** when something fails (rarely the case), because matched silicon parts are a must, otherwise its up in smoke again.
Bruno Putzeys once commented to me that "...amplifiers with the normal 20dB/decade [rising distortion] behaviour but whose distortion is not negligible at the end of the audio range have glassy mid-highs, a “superglue stereo image” and the illusion of spectacularly, unnaturally tight and impossibly controlled bass".
Could that be the reason why the 326 sounds so spectacular compared to the M3?
jan didden
> "...amplifiers with the normal 20dB/decade [rising distortion] behaviour but whose distortion is not negligible at the end of the audio range have glassy mid-highs, a “superglue stereo image” and the illusion of spectacularly, unnaturally tight and impossibly controlled bass"
Does that mean good music ?
Patrick
Does that mean good music ?
Patrick
Normally elastic deformation occurs at the tip´s contact area and the area increases. Without this reversible deformation, damage would most likely occur as the pressure would exeed the possibilities of vinyl.
There is surprising litte information about the resulting damage during normal replay; in some notes from manufacturers using records for quality control purposes (measuring of frequency response) reported a variation of <1dB after several thousands of replays.
Loescher & Hirsch reported less record wear after usage of Lencoclean, which means that they couldn´t see any visible defects after 1500 wet replays compared to a dry replay (using microscopes of course).
A lot of this early work was published in the JAES (as a collection for example in two anthologies on disc manufacturing and replay) and will be accessible today via the AES e-library.
There is surprising litte information about the resulting damage during normal replay; in some notes from manufacturers using records for quality control purposes (measuring of frequency response) reported a variation of <1dB after several thousands of replays.
Loescher & Hirsch reported less record wear after usage of Lencoclean, which means that they couldn´t see any visible defects after 1500 wet replays compared to a dry replay (using microscopes of course).
A lot of this early work was published in the JAES (as a collection for example in two anthologies on disc manufacturing and replay) and will be accessible today via the AES e-library.
And yet... all of the records that I played using Lencoclean (fortunately, not too many) turned horribly noisy. Several deep washings have not removed the noise. I haven't put them under microscopic analysis, but I do wonder if the rain slicked road caused repeated crashes into the guardrails.
That means I have no bias, no vested financial interest, nothing to sell and profit from personally. I sez 'em as I seez 'em.
Actually I have designed more things that were sold commercially than I can count. They just were not related to the audio industry. And BTW, many if not most of them carried far higher price tags than any stereo sound system, even very expensive ones. If my design approaches were in the same vein as much of what is called high end audio is designed, that is rejecting accepted mainstream engineering principles and making outrageous claims for performance that cannot be substantiated by demonstrated proof, I'd have had to go into a different line of work a long time ago.
"And yet... all of the records that I played using Lencoclean (fortunately, not too many) turned horribly noisy. Several deep washings have not removed the noise. I haven't put them under microscopic analysis, but I do wonder if the rain slicked road caused repeated crashes into the guardrails. "
help me out here SY . . . what in earth are you on about?
help me out here SY . . . what in earth are you on about?
That also means that your theories aren't backed up by practice, therefore they may be erroneous.
That would be an unfounded assumption. "My theories" are not my theories. They are the accepted scientific theories that were taught to me as the best available to explain observed facts during my formal education. These basic principles such as Newton's laws do not change with time. And they have been applied to other areas where they have demonstrated their validity by me and many others time and again. It is for those who reject these theories in order to advance their commercial products to prove that the mainstream accepted theories are wrong and to offer plausible explanations explaining why they are wrong or do not apply and offer credible alternative theories which explain why their products are superior. Instead, they invariably come up with some kind of voodoo logic where they admit they have no such theory, no measurements or evidence to prove what theories they do have, or simply rely on testimonials for endorsements. The reason the FDA and FTC were created was to remove these kinds of products from the market. Fortunately for the cottage audio industry that makes and sells these kinds of products, the market for them is so small that they are below the FTC's radar screen. FTC has much bigger fish to fry. Many in this industry are also very careful not to make any overt claims they cannot prove. They have lawyers who check their ad copy for anything that might be successfully challenged by the FTC to discredit them. All of their claims are implied leaving much of the selling of their products to the market itself, appealing to its imagination. The hobbyist magazines aid and abet them in this effort. Few if any really expensive products in this market today can demonstrate that they perform better in any meaningful objective way than products that are far less expensive.
Briefly: "Don't use a Lencoclean. It has ruined the records I've used it with."
I'm just speculating (no data), but I really wonder if the friction reduction has unintended consequences for groove damage. The observation that repeated washing doesn't get rid of the noise steers me away from the idea that the noise is caused by a chemical contamination from the Lenco fluid, and may be a result of the stylus slipping around in the groove and taking chunks of vinyl with it.
Your biases are quite evident from your writing on this forum. Biases are far more general than just vested financial interests.
Actually, Soundminded, I have designed loudspeakers, both with John Meyer, and by myself, in Switzerland, decades ago. For my test chamber, when on my own, without John Meyer, I used an open cliff and a balcony to test my loudspeaker design. When I worked with John Meyer, we used an FFT based Tektronix setup. I still have dozens of response graphs of my designs. I came to realize that mere measurements and understanding of loudspeaker design did NOT create a great loudspeaker, try as I did, and I have never tried to design a loudspeaker again. However, when it comes to phono cartridges, even though I have measured them more deeply than most here, I have never designed one, so I found it interesting for find out what makes the subtle differences between the expensive ones and the relatively cheap ones. Others have contributed to this thread to fill in this area, and I would even hope for more.
The same effect has been reported using just water to play old records "wet". Once wet always wet. Nothing like Kenny Rogers with a good bow wave.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.