Yes, it is very different than the way the boys get the girls.Hi mrfeedback,
For the price of the Die-case gaincone. I would like to ask for the 550USD. Ofcoz the case of the PSU must be better...
Actrully for the PSU I deside it possible supply for the 4 modules, for the bi-amp use...
And the transform which from the England called Airlink.
Best regards,
Hatasa
For the price of the Die-case gaincone. I would like to ask for the 550USD. Ofcoz the case of the PSU must be better...
Actrully for the PSU I deside it possible supply for the 4 modules, for the bi-amp use...
And the transform which from the England called Airlink.
Best regards,
Hatasa
Hi Steve,
It happens during the formative phase of the components. Every young conductor or resistor is joined up with an older, more experianced and politically reliable conductor of much larger gage (or higher wattage rating) in a "big brother" kind of mentoring relationship at the factory.
After a few months of training and conditioning, the budding part is finally ready to don it's new skin and be shipped out into the world. By this point the mentor has fully imprinted the direction he is to follow onto him and woe betide anyone who tries to reverse this. Like the saying goes. As the sapling is bent, so will it grow.
Personally I think the way to the ultimate DIY wire is to just draw a wire from a solid block of metal as it is soldered into the circuit. That way you will have complete control over the cable and won't to risk it being exposed to any herasies from the other wires laying about the warehouse (those coax cables are known troublemakers). Plus, I'll bet that dropping the odd recalitrant wire back into the melting pot would make a big impression on their comrades. Doubt if you'd have much trouble with unruly wires after that.
***************************************************
This bit of fun is just my way of saying, I have no idea where the concept of directional audio cables comes from. I have read lots of stuff about the crystalline structure of the wire being effected by the pulling direction, but never any convincing explaination for why this would be audible when carrying an AC signal.
I also once read a quote from a quality engineer at Belden about their supplying wire spools with directional arrows. "We get that request every so often. Our warehouse people are always happy to stencil an arrow on the spool before we ship it if the customer requests." Read into that what you wish.
I will see if I can hunt up the source of the Belden quote. I seem to recall reading it in one of the white papers on digital audio cables from Belden's website, but it was a few years ago and my memory of exactly where I read it is hazy.
Phil
It happens during the formative phase of the components. Every young conductor or resistor is joined up with an older, more experianced and politically reliable conductor of much larger gage (or higher wattage rating) in a "big brother" kind of mentoring relationship at the factory.
After a few months of training and conditioning, the budding part is finally ready to don it's new skin and be shipped out into the world. By this point the mentor has fully imprinted the direction he is to follow onto him and woe betide anyone who tries to reverse this. Like the saying goes. As the sapling is bent, so will it grow.
Personally I think the way to the ultimate DIY wire is to just draw a wire from a solid block of metal as it is soldered into the circuit. That way you will have complete control over the cable and won't to risk it being exposed to any herasies from the other wires laying about the warehouse (those coax cables are known troublemakers). Plus, I'll bet that dropping the odd recalitrant wire back into the melting pot would make a big impression on their comrades. Doubt if you'd have much trouble with unruly wires after that.
***************************************************
This bit of fun is just my way of saying, I have no idea where the concept of directional audio cables comes from. I have read lots of stuff about the crystalline structure of the wire being effected by the pulling direction, but never any convincing explaination for why this would be audible when carrying an AC signal.
I also once read a quote from a quality engineer at Belden about their supplying wire spools with directional arrows. "We get that request every so often. Our warehouse people are always happy to stencil an arrow on the spool before we ship it if the customer requests." Read into that what you wish.
I will see if I can hunt up the source of the Belden quote. I seem to recall reading it in one of the white papers on digital audio cables from Belden's website, but it was a few years ago and my memory of exactly where I read it is hazy.
Phil
Kuei Yang Wang said:
Hi,
I have over 40 years of audio experience, thank you, and as I said earlier (post#43), I don't wish to argue with you, or anyone else on this matter, and I am quite happy to post under my own name.
If you will read all that I have said (post#35), it should be clear what I meant here, and if you are determined to make such unnecessarily critical remarks, kindly do so about someone else.
In the other thread which was referred to, I went into considerable details over the use of law-faking resistors and I had already mentioned them earlier in this post too. I also said that I was not going to reiterate everything.
However, it seemed to me that in the question to which I responded, the enquirer believed that you could have a (mechanical) pot which you could simply choose to use in either a linear, or log manner, by simply connecting a different (or possibly additional) tag to ground.
This, as I still maintain, is most unlikely as it would need to have two *separate* tracks each of a different makeup (as I had also carefully explained before (post#35), including mentioning the difficulties in fabricating a log track without it being in the usual three 'jerky' discrete steps by using different resistivity sections.)
I am therefore well aware that you can do *anything* to effectively *modify* the 'taper' of *any* pot.
However, whilst any pot whether it has a hundred taps or not can be *modified* in the manner I have well covered before, the overall value of the pot will change, and the associated impedances will change, and this is not what was under discussion in this case.
Having hurtled rather rudely into saying that I "don't seem to have had much experience of audio electronics", are you now saying that my suggestion over this single tap on the pot (which had been queried) is incorrect, and that you really don't think it was intended for the (then, as it was a NOS pot) usual 'loudness' control?
Please think about this, and if after doing so you agree with me about this likelihood, why did you make such an unnecessary (not to mention incorrect) comment about my audio experiences?
Either way, there is absolutely no need for such ill-manners to be displayed in a Forum such as this!
Regards,
jean-paul said:Bob, how can you say that ? You know there is only one person on this board with audio experience !
We all know that J-P, but at least I don't need to hide behind a pseudonym.
If I had wanted to look for trouble too, there is plenty of opportunity here, and I would have taken up the relative 'sonic differences' in these various suggested methods of attenuation, the suggested ranking of which, I certainly don't agree with at all!
Regards,
haldor said:
Hehehe. Sad thing is, your "mentor" explanation makes about as much sense as anything else.
That would be Steve Lampen. He also had a bunch of cables made up with varying directions and sent a bunch out to some folks to see if they could tell the difference. This all played out in the rec.audio.* newsgroups some years back.
se
I did some tests for resistors directivity recently. Although I didn't think it was possible, I don't think I could be that wrong.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=123835#post123835
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=123835#post123835
Hi,
Okay.
Hmmm. I will repeat, if you take a LINEAR TRACK potentiometer and you "tap" the resistance track at one or several places, then simply by connecting a suitable value resistor from each "tap" to ground the behaviour as to rotation angle vs. attenuation becomes very similar to a logarythmic law potentiometer. The more taps the closer the matc, indeed a three-tap linear pot can give a much more accurate log response as most (if not all) log pot's with superb tracking at low levels.
Now this would appear to be EXACTLY what you calim to be UNLIKELY. Well, not only is it not just UNLIKELY, it is actually HIGHLY LIKELY and readily and often applied.
Now it should ALSO be clear that if I add further frequency dependend resistances (inductors/capacitors) I can offer a correction for the various variation of equal loudness curves. This however is a "free" throwin from the tapped linear pot and does NOT AT ALL require a tapped pot. The main reason for tapped pot in the era since stereo was an inexpensive, well tracking volume control.
I was merely observing your comments.
I KNOW for a fact that the tap is not primarily for "loudness" and if you actually dug such an old pot out you would find them to have a linear track. Well, production engineering is no easy task, either in application or comprehension.
Sayonara
Okay.
Hmmm. I will repeat, if you take a LINEAR TRACK potentiometer and you "tap" the resistance track at one or several places, then simply by connecting a suitable value resistor from each "tap" to ground the behaviour as to rotation angle vs. attenuation becomes very similar to a logarythmic law potentiometer. The more taps the closer the matc, indeed a three-tap linear pot can give a much more accurate log response as most (if not all) log pot's with superb tracking at low levels.
Now this would appear to be EXACTLY what you calim to be UNLIKELY. Well, not only is it not just UNLIKELY, it is actually HIGHLY LIKELY and readily and often applied.
Now it should ALSO be clear that if I add further frequency dependend resistances (inductors/capacitors) I can offer a correction for the various variation of equal loudness curves. This however is a "free" throwin from the tapped linear pot and does NOT AT ALL require a tapped pot. The main reason for tapped pot in the era since stereo was an inexpensive, well tracking volume control.
I was merely observing your comments.
I KNOW for a fact that the tap is not primarily for "loudness" and if you actually dug such an old pot out you would find them to have a linear track. Well, production engineering is no easy task, either in application or comprehension.
Sayonara
Philo said:
Hi,
Sorry about the delay in coming back on this one, but I got sidetracked by a minor irritation.
Leave this tap open for your uses, as, if you ground it, it will not provide a 'loudness' control without the use of some other component(s), and 'loudness' controls are not really Hi-Fi, anyway.
What it will do if it is simply grounded, is it will upset the overall impedances etc, and make the pot behave in an unusual manner, especially as I would stake my life on the fact that (from your description) you already have a log pot (with an audio taper), with the addition of a simple 'loudness' tap.
Interestingly, as I have said elsewhere, if you start to add any law-faking resistors to a *log* pot, you will most likely also end up with 'all of the action' at one end of the rotation, which will make it much less usable in practice.
Regards,
Unsolicited Audio Lessons!
Hi Kuei Yang Wang,
When your manners improve, and you learn to read what I have said *properly*, I will be happy to continue this discourse.
In the meantime, I need no lessons from you on this subject, thank you, and in fact the expression "teaching your grandmother to suck eggs" springs to mind for some inexplicable reason.
Regards,
Hi Kuei Yang Wang,
When your manners improve, and you learn to read what I have said *properly*, I will be happy to continue this discourse.
In the meantime, I need no lessons from you on this subject, thank you, and in fact the expression "teaching your grandmother to suck eggs" springs to mind for some inexplicable reason.
Regards,
Bob and Kuei,
I don't think there is a reason to argue about such thing as a simple pot. Bob had in mind a single pot, with double tapers, one for log, the other for linear application, without adding any extra resistors. If this caused misunderstranding, I think it's not worth any further talk.
It would be much more interesting to talk about direction in resistors.
I don't think there is a reason to argue about such thing as a simple pot. Bob had in mind a single pot, with double tapers, one for log, the other for linear application, without adding any extra resistors. If this caused misunderstranding, I think it's not worth any further talk.
It would be much more interesting to talk about direction in resistors.
Peter Daniel said:Bob and Kuei,
I don't think there is a reason to argue about such thing as a simple pot. Bob had in mind a single pot, with double tapers, one for log, the other for linear application, without adding any extra resistors. If this caused misunderstranding, I think it's not worth any further talk.
It would be much more interesting to talk about direction in resistors.
Hi,
I agree whole heartedly!
Regards,
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.