Elso I'm not sure I understand your first sentence. I don’t advocate commercial copying of designs, however point out that any competent engineer should be able to easily deduce simple circuit design with the product in front of him/her. I don’t want to wade into a discussion of who is competent and who may not be, however a simple oscillator could be reverse engineered in minutes. Other “tricks” to try to fool competitors were to grind the part numbers off integrated circuits and I must admit that could stump even the best! These days sophisticated electronics often contain proprietary integrated circuits which may be made specifically for that manufacturer. Not so common in analogue, but an example in digital is the Ring DAC used by Arcam. Without access to the IC supply it really doesn’t matter who knows the circuit. As I’m sure Lars will agree, much of the success of a design comes from areas such as board layout and component selection and these cannot generally be deduced from a circuit diagram. However I digress.
Actually “potting” used to be very common in RF oscillators. It is normally in wax to allow repair and is designed mainly to stop movement of the components, movement that may otherwise cause the oscillator to drift. These days SMDs have removed that need to a great extent due to their design, nevertheless in test instruments the master oscillator is normally contained in an “oven” to isolate it from mechanical and temperature disturbances.
Cheers,
Pete
Actually “potting” used to be very common in RF oscillators. It is normally in wax to allow repair and is designed mainly to stop movement of the components, movement that may otherwise cause the oscillator to drift. These days SMDs have removed that need to a great extent due to their design, nevertheless in test instruments the master oscillator is normally contained in an “oven” to isolate it from mechanical and temperature disturbances.
Cheers,
Pete
Nothing is Sacred
Jean-Paul ,
You completely misunderstood me.
When I said nothing is sacred I meant nothing is sacred for the copiers. Did you see for example the site www.audiotuning.de Their clock is almost exactly the same as the Lcaudio yet missing the word Lcaudio on the PCB.
I did not say anything negative about Guido's clock in my post. I will probably follow the same approach as Guido in my KWAK-CLOCK-8 i.e. milling off part numbers.
You want a list of the negative outings by Guido about my clock? I even wrote something nice about Guido's clock to Peter Qvortrup here:
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=digital&n=63875&highlight=elso+peter&r=&session=
And helped you once on this forum with the installation of the.......Tent Clock!
jean-paul said:
Jean-Paul ,
You completely misunderstood me.
When I said nothing is sacred I meant nothing is sacred for the copiers. Did you see for example the site www.audiotuning.de Their clock is almost exactly the same as the Lcaudio yet missing the word Lcaudio on the PCB.
I did not say anything negative about Guido's clock in my post. I will probably follow the same approach as Guido in my KWAK-CLOCK-8 i.e. milling off part numbers.
You want a list of the negative outings by Guido about my clock? I even wrote something nice about Guido's clock to Peter Qvortrup here:
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=digital&n=63875&highlight=elso+peter&r=&session=
And helped you once on this forum with the installation of the.......Tent Clock!
Nothing is Sacred
Hi Pete,
I hope I expressed myself better in my reply to Jean-Paul.
I am not happy with commercial copiers.
The emphasis should be on competent for "competent engineer"....
Thanks for the hint about the wax potting!. I only considered epoxy or polyurethane potting but was afraid of the high frequency effects on the circuit.
Pete Fleming said:
Hi Pete,
I hope I expressed myself better in my reply to Jean-Paul.
I am not happy with commercial copiers.
The emphasis should be on competent for "competent engineer"....
Thanks for the hint about the wax potting!. I only considered epoxy or polyurethane potting but was afraid of the high frequency effects on the circuit.
Gentlemen!
Hi Guy's,
Jean-Paul, with all due respect, you'r wrong about this!!!!!!!!!
I happen to know (not personal, but by e-mail) both guy's and both respect eachother and says good things about the other.
The fact that Elso refer to the things Guido does, is just to say that this is a good way to protect your own IP.
So please do not think that Elso nor Guido dislike or even wors hate the other, on the contrary, they both respect eachother!
I can proof it, but will not post this on the forum, both guys are nice and friendly.
I'm a satisfied Kwak Clock user, and Guido is a nice and great guy for sure!
Just my 2 cents.
Audiofanatic
jean-paul said:
Hi Guy's,
Jean-Paul, with all due respect, you'r wrong about this!!!!!!!!!
I happen to know (not personal, but by e-mail) both guy's and both respect eachother and says good things about the other.
The fact that Elso refer to the things Guido does, is just to say that this is a good way to protect your own IP.
So please do not think that Elso nor Guido dislike or even wors hate the other, on the contrary, they both respect eachother!
I can proof it, but will not post this on the forum, both guys are nice and friendly.
Great for you and Guido!
I'm a satisfied Kwak Clock user, and Guido is a nice and great guy for sure!
Just my 2 cents.
Audiofanatic
Re: Nothing is Sacred
I am probably not the only one that misunderstood that first sentence. So you did not say negative things in this post, I am sorry I understood it as I did.
You helped me with the installation of a Tent clock !??! Cool, I helped Guido once with the installation of a Kwak clock. We both liked it a lot
This was a joke and should not be taken seriously....
Concerning the potting: be sure to not use polyester as it will become hot and sometimes it will not totally harden when fairly large volumes are potted. Epoxy is much better. Drawback of these methods is that the gear that's potted is a PITA to take apart in case of a failure. Throwing it away and rebuild the thing is the best option left. I use the 3M stuff they use for potting high voltage joints. No heat buildup and clean hands because of the method ( two components in the bag that come together when you break the seal ). Smells terribly but easy to work with.
Elso Kwak said:
Jean-Paul ,
You completely misunderstood me.
When I said nothing is sacred I meant nothing is sacred for the copiers. Did you see for example the site www.audiotuning.de Their clock is almost exactly the same as the Lcaudio yet missing the word Lcaudio on the PCB.
I did not say anything negative about Guido's clock in my post. I will probably follow the same approach as Guido in my KWAK-CLOCK-8 i.e. milling off part numbers.
You want a list of the negative outings by Guido about my clock? I even wrote something nice about Guido's clock to Peter Qvortrup here:
http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=digital&n=63875&highlight=elso+peter&r=&session=
And helped you once on this forum with the installation of the.......Tent Clock!
I am probably not the only one that misunderstood that first sentence. So you did not say negative things in this post, I am sorry I understood it as I did.
You helped me with the installation of a Tent clock !??! Cool, I helped Guido once with the installation of a Kwak clock. We both liked it a lot
This was a joke and should not be taken seriously....
Concerning the potting: be sure to not use polyester as it will become hot and sometimes it will not totally harden when fairly large volumes are potted. Epoxy is much better. Drawback of these methods is that the gear that's potted is a PITA to take apart in case of a failure. Throwing it away and rebuild the thing is the best option left. I use the 3M stuff they use for potting high voltage joints. No heat buildup and clean hands because of the method ( two components in the bag that come together when you break the seal ). Smells terribly but easy to work with.
Re: Re: Nothing is Sacred
LOL
Audiofanatic
jean-paul said:
I am probably not the only one that misunderstood that first sentence. So you did not say negative things in this post, I am sorry I understood it as I did.
You helped me with the installation of a Tent clock !??! Cool, I helped Guido once with the installation of a Kwak clock. We both liked it a lot
This was a joke and should not be taken seriously....
LOL
Audiofanatic
jean-paul said:
Me too.
And it's a pleasure to order from Guido Tent, really a nice guy.
I can't say the same from other people.
Some time ago I ordered a CS8412 from a guy, put 20 Euros inside an envelope, sent it and received from him the confirmation that my money got there intact.
What I have never received was the CS8412.
Sent him a mail and he just said, "Carlos, that never happened to me, it's impossible".
This just doesn't happen with Guido Tent, no way.
He once sent me two more clocks because the mail system was taking too long.
I received a duplicated order, payed for 2 and received 4.
Of course I sent two clocks back to Guido.
Pete Fleming: You are right... If the reader of the schematic is a competent engineer, he will probably not copy it, but instead find inspirations here and there.
On the other hand if he has the intent of copying the product, in my experience, you can give the incompetent copying engineer all the information in the world including schematics etc, and he will still get it wrong. Something like all the decoupling caps in one corner of the PCB, since they are connected anyway. The product he ends up with will always be of lesser performance than the original.
My bigger concern is: is the customer critical enough to compare the copy with the original, or just throw 100$ after the copy thinking it's 'probably just as good'? Do you as a customer invest in quality or second grade?
Also we have a saying here in Denmark: If you walk in other people's footsteps, you are very unlikely to get ahead! If you look at ASE Audiotuning i think you can see what i mean by this analogy.
Arcam: You are right, at first glance the schematic is very much alike. However if you take a look at the oscillator transistor, in the Arcam, i think you will find the label: 'BC547' on it. Some would argue this one is a bit noisy, and also too slow (high CB capacitances) for an 11.2 MHz oscillator. It is what you Americans would call 2N2222 or MPSA06.
But probably still better than the vintage 74HCU04 inverter oscillator, used in almost any CD / SACD player. Why it is still so widespread is a real puzzle. (Apart from its low price).
Did anybody at the big factories ever measure the jitter and noise of the 74HCU04 (or alike) based oscillator?
Or just not interested as long as the CD spins? If so my comment is that all it takes to make your CD player better than the competition is: a good clock! It's as simple as that........
Also there are other differences in parts.
Take the crystal, we use hand ground fundamental mode xtals, that cost 'a little bit' more than a standard off-the-shelf xtal.
So you are right, you can make a cheap clock that works, by copying someones design. And it may also have some effect on the sound quality.
However to make true high performance, you have to put a little more effort than glancing on the schematic and copy it with cheap parts.
Lastly i will add that if you look on the photos of our clocks you might have noticed that they were silently upgraded (6 months ago). Our current versions are improved by a factor, compared to the schematics published here, using all new parts on critical positions.
All the best from Denmark
If the reader of the schematic is a competent engineer, he will probably not copy it, but instead find inspirations here and there. On the other hand if he has the intent of copying the product, in my experience, you can give the incompetent copying engineer all the information in the world including schematics etc, and he will still get it wrong. Something like all the decoupling caps in one corner of the PCB, since they are connected anyway.
The product he ends up with will always be of lesser performance than the original.My bigger concern is: is the customer critical enough to compare the copy with the original, or just throw 100$ after the copy thinking it's 'probably just as good'? Do you as a customer invest in quality or second grade?
Also we have a saying here in Denmark: If you walk in other people's footsteps, you are very unlikely to get ahead! If you look at ASE Audiotuning i think you can see what i mean by this analogy.
Arcam: You are right, at first glance the schematic is very much alike. However if you take a look at the oscillator transistor, in the Arcam, i think you will find the label: 'BC547' on it. Some would argue this one is a bit noisy, and also too slow (high CB capacitances) for an 11.2 MHz oscillator. It is what you Americans would call 2N2222 or MPSA06.
But probably still better than the vintage 74HCU04 inverter oscillator, used in almost any CD / SACD player. Why it is still so widespread is a real puzzle. (Apart from its low price).
Did anybody at the big factories ever measure the jitter and noise of the 74HCU04 (or alike) based oscillator?
Or just not interested as long as the CD spins? If so my comment is that all it takes to make your CD player better than the competition is: a good clock! It's as simple as that........
Also there are other differences in parts.
Take the crystal, we use hand ground fundamental mode xtals, that cost 'a little bit' more than a standard off-the-shelf xtal.
So you are right, you can make a cheap clock that works, by copying someones design. And it may also have some effect on the sound quality.
However to make true high performance, you have to put a little more effort than glancing on the schematic and copy it with cheap parts.
Lastly i will add that if you look on the photos of our clocks you might have noticed that they were silently upgraded (6 months ago). Our current versions are improved by a factor, compared to the schematics published here, using all new parts on critical positions.
All the best from Denmark
Guido Tent should be leading a Philips I&D department related to audio products.
Are these guys blind?
Maby we would have much better CDPs, SACD players or whatever.
Meanwhile, I haven't heard anything from the new "enhanced resolution" formats that really makes me change from what I have.
In fact, it's worst.
Are these guys blind?
Maby we would have much better CDPs, SACD players or whatever.
Meanwhile, I haven't heard anything from the new "enhanced resolution" formats that really makes me change from what I have.
In fact, it's worst.
Lars, greetings also from Australia. You are quite right, the Arcam does use the BC547, and I have no doubt that there are better alternatives. However this illustrates my point that there is often little point in trying to “protect” one’s intellectual property through secrecy and legal means when often the very reason that product performs so well has more to do with “art” than science.
As an analogy, I sometimes enjoy cooking, however a chef I am most certainly not. I have a superb meal in a restaurant and maybe befriend the chef who gives me the recipe. I go up to the local supermarket, buy the ingredients and proceed to cook this great dish at home. I taste it, but it is nowhere near as good as that I tasted in the restaurant. Why not? I have the same recipe and used the “same” ingredients. It doesn’t taste the same because the chef didn’t go up to the supermarket to buy the ingredients, at 0530 that morning they were off to the market as it opened to get the best before everyone else. They didn’t cook it at home, instead had the facilities of a professional kitchen. They had probably also cooked the dish hundreds, maybe even thousands of times previously, experimenting with timing and so on and learning what works and what doesn’t.
The point is the chef in this case has lost nothing from sharing the recipe. A good chef going to that restaurant (a competitor) could probably deduce the ingredients simply from the taste. A bad chef could probably not emulate the dish to the same standard anyway. Instead, by sharing he has won the respect of a customer who further appreciates the “art” that goes into the craft and will still return to that restaurant in the future.
I don’t find the analogy too far removed from the field we discuss. The more things change, the more they stay the same, there is little true innovation going on in this field, as controversial as that statement seems. However “art” and refinement constantly evolves. It’s nice to see people promoting the art, creating an interest, sometimes a passion, that infects others.
Cheers,
Pete
As an analogy, I sometimes enjoy cooking, however a chef I am most certainly not. I have a superb meal in a restaurant and maybe befriend the chef who gives me the recipe. I go up to the local supermarket, buy the ingredients and proceed to cook this great dish at home. I taste it, but it is nowhere near as good as that I tasted in the restaurant. Why not? I have the same recipe and used the “same” ingredients. It doesn’t taste the same because the chef didn’t go up to the supermarket to buy the ingredients, at 0530 that morning they were off to the market as it opened to get the best before everyone else. They didn’t cook it at home, instead had the facilities of a professional kitchen. They had probably also cooked the dish hundreds, maybe even thousands of times previously, experimenting with timing and so on and learning what works and what doesn’t.
The point is the chef in this case has lost nothing from sharing the recipe. A good chef going to that restaurant (a competitor) could probably deduce the ingredients simply from the taste. A bad chef could probably not emulate the dish to the same standard anyway. Instead, by sharing he has won the respect of a customer who further appreciates the “art” that goes into the craft and will still return to that restaurant in the future.
I don’t find the analogy too far removed from the field we discuss. The more things change, the more they stay the same, there is little true innovation going on in this field, as controversial as that statement seems. However “art” and refinement constantly evolves. It’s nice to see people promoting the art, creating an interest, sometimes a passion, that infects others.
Cheers,
Pete
carlosfm said:Guido Tent should be leading a Philips I&D department related to audio products.
Are these guys blind?
Maby we would have much better CDPs, SACD players or whatever.
Meanwhile, I haven't heard anything from the new "enhanced resolution" formats that really makes me change from what I have.
In fact, it's worst.
Hi
Actually I work on recordable DVD (first on AV products, now on PC drives)
Philips' focus is different from high end market. There is a bunch of talented engineers, but the marketing department decides.
As happens more often: The big companies have the engineers, buying power and equipment, but no interest. The smaller companies have the interest, but lack time, money and a staff of engineers.
To work around this, We recently formed a new company, staffed with 4 people who also have other incomes.
We claim to design and introduce the best sounding DSD A to D converter, as a contribution to better sound in the world.
Next week the site will be upgraded, but we quickly put something there already
www.grimmaudio.com
enjoy
Unfortunately it’s been my experience that most of the major record companies really don’t care too much about quality when releasing CDs to the mass market. The technology is already there right now, probably in the studio, but who cares when 99% of the people will play the music through mid-fi (or worse) equipment. Compress, compress, and push it out in minimum studio time. I once complained to a local label about the quality of one of their CDs (one track alone had well over 1000 cases of digital clipping). Their reply? “We have sold over 100,000 disks and you’re the only one to complain” … (to which I asked how many hamburgers they think McDonalds sells each day if that’s their measure of quality!). A well recorded and mastered CD is really very good, pity they’re so few and far between these days.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.