If it not getting off subject I love beer also . You know beer is transistors and wine is valves . Only in our world the transistors have won . I think good beer has more complexity than many wines . I like my beer slightly flat and warm as ours is . Warm means 10 C not 4C . It is often said beer has to be excellent to be drunk as we do . Young red wine is excellent when chilled . Drink it with fish as the southern French do . I always drink what I fancy with meals . I think it was Gorge V1's equerry who was asked " does the King know it is bad taste to ware brown shoes with a blue pin striped suit " to which he answered " he does , therefor it is not " . I know what is wrong in electronics ( more than many who would tell me is my bet ) . Doesn't stop me trying it every time just in case it works . Perhaps 3 % of the time it does and was worth knowing . Best example was not fitting a current source to a MOSFET amp driver . It was fitted in the end because it costs peanuts . With real music a resistor was good enough . The CCS did no harm and measured 100 W at 50 kHz better . Did it do any good ? I doubt it did . Will I always fit a CCS ? Yes . That's when right is wrong is right . I would call it marginally right with strong acceptability to others . Bootstrap CCS probably better .
since we're discussing listening vs measuring
i'll try to stay on topic, only veer slightly outside of reproduction of sound and into production of sound.
so here i am, browsing stores for guitar gear. I already had a amp/fx/cab simulator which had fantastic sound (line6 podfarm 2) but yeah well i'm a hardware ***** what can i say. It's like i'm allergic to cash.
i would frequently hear "tube guitar amps are louder than ss guitar amps", whatever, i was ignoring it, but i did agree with the idea that tube guitar amps sound better than ss guitar amps.
so i ask the guitar-shop minion to show me an affordable amp. They said they had two available, one 1W that was nondescript and, well, lame and another one, a 15 W. Whatever, let's plug it in. I let it warm up (no big deal, about 10 seconds) and start noodling around.
my jaw reached mach 2 while approaching the floor.
I was frickin' awestruck. Grinning like a little girl that got her pony for christmas.
So yeah, i bought it. At a "Display item" discount, ~30% off.
fun thing is, tube guitar amps respond VERY well to overdriven input. the more you give it, the better its distortion sounds. In stark contrast with ss guitar amps that if overdriven sound like, i dunno, a horrible car crash.
so i take this amp for a jamming session with another guitarist and a drummer. The drummer looks at it and says "15 watts? is it enough?" -" i haven't got the slightest idea, never played with another person with this amp before"
the drummer sits inside his kit, my amp is in the opposite corner of the room, dialed to about 7/10. two minutes into the session the drummer goes "hey can you turn it down a bit, i can't hear my drums".
i'll try to stay on topic, only veer slightly outside of reproduction of sound and into production of sound.
so here i am, browsing stores for guitar gear. I already had a amp/fx/cab simulator which had fantastic sound (line6 podfarm 2) but yeah well i'm a hardware ***** what can i say. It's like i'm allergic to cash.
i would frequently hear "tube guitar amps are louder than ss guitar amps", whatever, i was ignoring it, but i did agree with the idea that tube guitar amps sound better than ss guitar amps.
so i ask the guitar-shop minion to show me an affordable amp. They said they had two available, one 1W that was nondescript and, well, lame and another one, a 15 W. Whatever, let's plug it in. I let it warm up (no big deal, about 10 seconds) and start noodling around.
my jaw reached mach 2 while approaching the floor.
I was frickin' awestruck. Grinning like a little girl that got her pony for christmas.
So yeah, i bought it. At a "Display item" discount, ~30% off.
fun thing is, tube guitar amps respond VERY well to overdriven input. the more you give it, the better its distortion sounds. In stark contrast with ss guitar amps that if overdriven sound like, i dunno, a horrible car crash.
so i take this amp for a jamming session with another guitarist and a drummer. The drummer looks at it and says "15 watts? is it enough?" -" i haven't got the slightest idea, never played with another person with this amp before"
the drummer sits inside his kit, my amp is in the opposite corner of the room, dialed to about 7/10. two minutes into the session the drummer goes "hey can you turn it down a bit, i can't hear my drums".
Nige, because a resistor for the current source "will do" is not to say you can't do better. Junk food MacDonald's "will do" if nothing better is available.
And you said it yourself - it costs peanuts to do a decent CCS. All you need are two standard 1N4148 diodes, two resistors and one transistor. If you want to sex it up, add a polyester capacitor, say 200 nF, in parallel with the diodes. If, for some reason, you prefer a slightly higher voltage, exchange one of the diodes for a zener diode.
Or just use two transistors and two resistors. Couple them back to back with some thermal compund and you get rid of thermal effects for most part.
It's like sizing your output stage. Just because you can squeeze 100 Watts from a single transistor pair, that's not to say you should; you can also jump from a bridge, but you don't, do you?
Back to my theory of balance - how complex your CCS is should depend on the level of performance you are aiming for and on the complexity and level of the rest of the circuit.
And you said it yourself - it costs peanuts to do a decent CCS. All you need are two standard 1N4148 diodes, two resistors and one transistor. If you want to sex it up, add a polyester capacitor, say 200 nF, in parallel with the diodes. If, for some reason, you prefer a slightly higher voltage, exchange one of the diodes for a zener diode.
Or just use two transistors and two resistors. Couple them back to back with some thermal compund and you get rid of thermal effects for most part.
It's like sizing your output stage. Just because you can squeeze 100 Watts from a single transistor pair, that's not to say you should; you can also jump from a bridge, but you don't, do you?
Back to my theory of balance - how complex your CCS is should depend on the level of performance you are aiming for and on the complexity and level of the rest of the circuit.
Some tuners allowed to receive the same station 10.7 MHz apart. As the result, they received more of stations than were broadcasting.
Sensitivity of tuners was selected according to distances between stations broadcasting on the same frequency. A tuner good for Siberia would be bad for Berlin, and vice verse. FM tuners did not use AGC like AM tuners did. They amplified everything equally, then limited signals eliminating such a way amplitude modulation that was parasitic in case of Frequency Modulated broadcasts. That's why different regions needed different receivers.
Sensitivity of tuners was selected according to distances between stations broadcasting on the same frequency. A tuner good for Siberia would be bad for Berlin, and vice verse. FM tuners did not use AGC like AM tuners did. They amplified everything equally, then limited signals eliminating such a way amplitude modulation that was parasitic in case of Frequency Modulated broadcasts. That's why different regions needed different receivers.
Last edited:
Some tuners allowed to receive the same station 10.7 MHz apart. As the result, they received more of stations than were broadcasting.
.
Some tuners allowed to receive the same station 10.7 MHz apart. As the result, they received more of stations than were broadcasting.
Sensitivity of tuners was selected according to distances between stations broadcasting on the same frequency. A tuner good for Siberia would be bad for Berlin, and vice verse. FM tuners did not use AGC like AM tuners did. They amplified everything equally, then limited signals eliminating such a way amplitude modulation that was parasitic in case of Frequency Modulated broadcasts. That's why different regions needed different receivers.
Wave, what would you be doing with an FM stereo tuner in Siberia?
Even one which pulls in every station except the bus station?
But seriously, your point is well taken. I learnt about that effect from practice. Way back in the Dark Ages of audio (70ies), some highly touted Japanese tuners were put to shame by a receiver (Tandberg 2075) and some cheaper tuners (Marantz) under local conditions. I must add that Belgrade is built on a series of hills and small valleys, VERY difficult terrain for any tuner, and typically, some stations you receive extremely well, while others you can barely hear.
In a city, AM suppression and high tolerance of multipath seem to be the prevailing characteristics, and I suspect in the American Mid Western plains, the tables could be turned.
Tandberg came from Norway, with its jagged coastline and fiords all over, so their tuners are likely to do well in a city. The Marantz (model 2120 if memory serves) was not particularly sensitive, it missed pulling in some weaker stations, but what it did pull in was cleaner and less troublesome than the much costlier competition from Kenwood and Pioneer.
In the late 70ies, Technics' model 7300 (I think?) seemed a great bet in the city, somehow it seemed to be good in just about everything, while costing a reasonable sum for what you got. The reVox B760 still beat it, but then it cost less than 30% of that reVox, a credit to its makers.
With the advent of cable, all this was made very relative all over again, since the signal provided was linear 87-108 MHz, multipath problems were all but forgotten and by then, there were around 50 local stations to pull in.
When I was a little boy I received a pewter tankard ( drinking mug with glass bottom ) from Tandburg for redesigning the phono input of one of their receivers . It was the all in one design with Dual 12 series idler driven turntable . The cartridge was a Shure perhaps M44/7 . I calculated that the ideal input was 3.5 mV and the actual Shure output 9.5 mV . I know a lot of the Tandburg story , much of it ends badly . The man who gave me the award ( Tom Harding of Farnell ? ) said the wife of the Tandburg company director and B&O's wife met at a party . B&O says " love the sound of your new product , but the looks " ? The replay was " love the looks of yours , but what about the sound " ?
Interestingly B&O about 1973 had a receiver that was highly recommended with superb specs . It looked fabulous and was in the 1.2 uV sensitivity range with excellent capture ratio and image rejection ( perfect notch filter ) . The amplifiers always were highly commended also . I was very surprised to see the circuit . The most simple design ever by a mile . Even electronics magazines were more complex for beginners ( PE Texan for example ) . The outputs make 2N3055 look desirable ( later versions used very industrial Darlingtons ) . However they were descent designs .
I was told that B&O's technical dept was the best in the world . However most of it's patent's were used by others . Dolby HX pro for example , a work of simple genius . The most specialized MM PU ever , B&O MMC 20 . Perhaps not the best . It rates with my VW Golf as how to do a good design . Pump a Golf up and you get Lamborghini these days ( and R8 ) . That's what never happened at B&O . They should have bought Quad and done an Aston Martin .
I had a B&O system to sell from part exchange . The speakers seemed to be KEF and Celestion ( a lovely mix ) . The parallel tracking deck which required a few parts ( very cheap for complex parts £16 I seem to remember ) . I had to virtually give the system away . Someone said secondhand B&O has no market because it is a fashion statement .
The little Tandburg would be ideal for someone wanting a nice do everything device . The Dual was my introduction to the make . A Goldring 1042 would suit both the arm and PU input . Speakers I sold with it would be KEF Coda , Castle Richmond , Celestion 15 . I must say this . I loved the Tandburg brand . As much as their reputation for radio design was a legend ,the radio sections seemed not as good as some not noted for it . Sony for example . I have a Sony ST3950 of that vintage . It is superb even on Shortwave . It was mid priced so ignored by everyone . ST 88 was delightful ( and TA 88 ) . First time I ever saw an IEC socket was on them two .
Interestingly B&O about 1973 had a receiver that was highly recommended with superb specs . It looked fabulous and was in the 1.2 uV sensitivity range with excellent capture ratio and image rejection ( perfect notch filter ) . The amplifiers always were highly commended also . I was very surprised to see the circuit . The most simple design ever by a mile . Even electronics magazines were more complex for beginners ( PE Texan for example ) . The outputs make 2N3055 look desirable ( later versions used very industrial Darlingtons ) . However they were descent designs .
I was told that B&O's technical dept was the best in the world . However most of it's patent's were used by others . Dolby HX pro for example , a work of simple genius . The most specialized MM PU ever , B&O MMC 20 . Perhaps not the best . It rates with my VW Golf as how to do a good design . Pump a Golf up and you get Lamborghini these days ( and R8 ) . That's what never happened at B&O . They should have bought Quad and done an Aston Martin .
I had a B&O system to sell from part exchange . The speakers seemed to be KEF and Celestion ( a lovely mix ) . The parallel tracking deck which required a few parts ( very cheap for complex parts £16 I seem to remember ) . I had to virtually give the system away . Someone said secondhand B&O has no market because it is a fashion statement .
The little Tandburg would be ideal for someone wanting a nice do everything device . The Dual was my introduction to the make . A Goldring 1042 would suit both the arm and PU input . Speakers I sold with it would be KEF Coda , Castle Richmond , Celestion 15 . I must say this . I loved the Tandburg brand . As much as their reputation for radio design was a legend ,the radio sections seemed not as good as some not noted for it . Sony for example . I have a Sony ST3950 of that vintage . It is superb even on Shortwave . It was mid priced so ignored by everyone . ST 88 was delightful ( and TA 88 ) . First time I ever saw an IEC socket was on them two .
Some tuners allowed to receive the same station 10.7 MHz apart. As the result, they received more of stations than were broadcasting.
Nice try but in the '80s in Stuttgart you could actually receive 26 different FM stereo stations with a good tuner but with a lesser one they would not all be in stereo and possibly noisy.
On the whole most digitally controlled tuners of the day faired substantially less well than fully analogue ones. The sole exception was the ReVox.
I remember a NAD tuner of the day barely managed 8 stations.
European FM tuners (with 10.7MHz IF) might receive stations 21.4MHz apart, but fortunately our FM band is only 20MHz wide. 3rd order IM or half-IF can add extra spurious signals.
Decent FM tuners do use AGC. Most FM chips produce an AGC output for the front end. This means that the signal level going in to the limiter can be about right for best performance. Many FM tuners have poorly designed AGC. You can tell this if the difference between, say, -50dB quieting and -70dB quieting is significantly greater than 20dB in input signal level; this means the AGC is acting too early because the front end has too much gain.
It is possible to design a tuner which works OK both under fringe and crowded band conditions, but it costs a bit more as the front end has to use communications receiver type techniques.
Decent FM tuners do use AGC. Most FM chips produce an AGC output for the front end. This means that the signal level going in to the limiter can be about right for best performance. Many FM tuners have poorly designed AGC. You can tell this if the difference between, say, -50dB quieting and -70dB quieting is significantly greater than 20dB in input signal level; this means the AGC is acting too early because the front end has too much gain.
It is possible to design a tuner which works OK both under fringe and crowded band conditions, but it costs a bit more as the front end has to use communications receiver type techniques.
Last edited:
When I was a little boy I bought this one below ( Akai AA8080 , anyone got a circuit ) . By a gnats whisker it had the best specs for receiving distant stations and very little multi-path distortion problems . I was 100 kM from my favourite station . The only tuner I found beat it was an Awai some years later . It had mediocre sound but had a usable 0.8uV sensitivity ( 26 dB quietening as was said , used a step notch filter with that setting called narrow ) . I supplied one to a man in the Isles of Wight . he received signal across the sea . It was not only the sensitivity it was the ability to cope with a poor signal . I noticed the later turners using digital synthesis never matched the analogue ones . Hitachi 5500 ( FT ? ) was the favourite of that type . Denon was a division of Hitachi . The Sony ST5650 probably was the best all round tuner that you might by for sensible money . The Yamaha was excellent as were the Kenwoods . Have a Revox somewhere . Not sure what I felt about it . It was perhaps over sold . I simply love the Quad FM3 . On paper nothing special . On music it is special . FM 2 was not bad nor good . The Leak was the better one in valves .
Akai Stereo Receiver Model AA-8080
Akai Stereo Receiver Model AA-8080
Last edited:
When I was a little boy I bought this one below ( Akai AA8080 , anyone got a circuit ) . By a gnats whisker it had the best specs for receiving distant stations and very little multi-path distortion problems . I was 100 kM from my favourite station . The only tuner I found beat it was an Awai some years later . The Aiwa had mediocre sound but had a usable 0.8uV sensitivity ( 26 dB quietening as was said , used a steep notch filter with that setting called narrow ) . I supplied one to a man in the Isles of Wight . He received signal across the sea . It was not only the sensitivity it was the ability to cope with a poor signal . I noticed the later turners using digital synthesis never matched the analogue ones . Hitachi 5500 ( FT ? ) was the favourite of that type . Denon was a division of Hitachi . The Sony ST5650 probably was the best all round tuner that you might buy for sensible money . The Yamaha was excellent as were the Kenwoods . Have a Revox somewhere . Not sure what I felt about it . It was perhaps over sold . I simply love the Quad FM3 . On paper nothing special . On music it is special . FM 2 was not bad nor good . The Leak was the better one in valves .
Akai Stereo Receiver Model AA-8080
Akai Stereo Receiver Model AA-8080
Last edited:
Even with a tremendous stock diffusion, 2% makes no-one a part of anyone else.
As for sharing, the Japanese were always much stronger on that point than anyone else in the world. Everybody and their dog bought Alps pots, their cassette deck drive mechanisms, and so forth, in the 80ies, CEC was making like 50% of all turntables coming out of Japan, of course, looking different and bearing various brand names.
They understood what the British audio industry never understood - the economies of volume. To have a relatively cheap, but well made products, on an industrial scale, you need to be making hundres of thousands of whatever, and the customer doesn't care one bit if drive mechanisms inside cassette decks in 10 famous brands all came from the same place, didn't even think about it, why should he?
I guarantee that if, for example, the Ferrograph open reel tape decks were repackaged externally and rebadged, that company would probably be still with us today and would have been a much stronger player in those days than it ever was or could have been on its own. Ferrograph is my weak spot, their build quality was the only one which could compete with Studer/reVox on an even footing. Outstanding quality! Not so good electronics, but it's easy to change printed ciruit boards.
Ultimately, this is what the Chinese are doing today - economy of scale, coupled with ridiculously low wages. That's how Japan came up, that's how Taiwan came up, that's how China will come up.
While England keeps the Queen and its organized anarchy system, in which everybody does their thing all on their own, and God forbid that they should share facilities to drive the price down. The country which invented the industrial revolution is now promoting cottage industry.
Last edited:
Well,
I think the UK needs a rocket up its a**. From what I can see at the moment it’s like we are going back to the stone age..
We are in a time warp and is back to the past
The innovation could easily be there..however its hampered by politics..and greed..The rich get richer and the workers get beaten with a stick and told to stop trying to put things wright that they don’t understand..
It feels like Dick Turpin has finally got his way…(The Highwayman)
The whole world is in disarray.. and the people that could do something aren’t interested..
It feels like Nero playing his harp as Rome burns…
If it wasn’t so desperate it would be funny…
One more thing while I'm having a rant...every other country in the world seemed to see this coming..not us Oh yes we have won the Olympics ...bankrupt the country for a bike race...
Regards
M. Gregg
I think the UK needs a rocket up its a**. From what I can see at the moment it’s like we are going back to the stone age..
We are in a time warp and is back to the past
The innovation could easily be there..however its hampered by politics..and greed..The rich get richer and the workers get beaten with a stick and told to stop trying to put things wright that they don’t understand..
It feels like Dick Turpin has finally got his way…(The Highwayman)
The whole world is in disarray.. and the people that could do something aren’t interested..
It feels like Nero playing his harp as Rome burns…
If it wasn’t so desperate it would be funny…
One more thing while I'm having a rant...every other country in the world seemed to see this coming..not us Oh yes we have won the Olympics ...bankrupt the country for a bike race...
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.