Pano, what you said is pretty depressing - the people with the money and interest don't "get it", and the ones who have no trouble hearing what's good and what's not are not into 'audio' in any particular sense ...
Doesn't bode well for the future ... might take another generation that's coming, to cotton on to a better way ...
Doesn't bode well for the future ... might take another generation that's coming, to cotton on to a better way ...
But, it does give indicators to what people find important. You see, how the bad sound in many of the YouTube high end clips is quite apparent, is exactly how the live listening to these systems comes across to me. The mic pickup of the video camera doesn't 'lie', in terms of picking up the typical artifacts that many audio systems produce, and the YouTube quality just reinforces, emphasises those lackings ..
Actually in that case it was more complicated than, because even the man who owned the system didn't think it was Best in Show. At least at the time.* Even very smart, talented people can get distracted by shiny objects. We're all human. I had the advantage of being young, naive and in the classical music biz - I didn't know what was supposed to be better. Sure, the superior systems had lower lows, higher highs, more dynamic dynamics and so forth. Didn't matter, they didn't sound as much like the real thing, as good as they were.
That's a common thread I find at shows. The systems that sound real to me are always rated high, but never the best. Audio geeks love numbers and superlatives, cool technology, novelty and trends. So many of those systems sound like great Hi-Fi to me, but not like music. It's an important distinction.
*Those speakers went on to be a reference for more than 20 years. I felt validated.
I've been cured of such leanings over the years by hearing appalling sound coming from such devices on far too many occasions ...
So, 'great Hi-Fi' can't reproduce music - sounds about right to me !!
Personally, I feel you're going astray here:
In terms of what we're talking about just now, this is just wrong, IME. Put it this way -- give me just about any speakers, allow me to fix up junk mistakes in the assembly of them, I would attach a sorted out earlier audio chain - and you would get the 'live music' experience that we're seeking, etc, etc ...
such a "cite" seems a useless waste, actually reducing "understanding"
compared to a better diy-audio thread's depth:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/power-supplies/126697-bypassing-psu-capacitors-effective.html
Wow, Frank. You must not have run into very many bad speakers.
At any rate, I think the point is that the average speaker does much worse things to the sound than the average "rest of the system". And it's much easier to design an amplifier with vanishingly-small distortions than it is to design a speaker that has vanishingly-small distortions, even only at one point in space in a particular room.
At any rate, I think the point is that the average speaker does much worse things to the sound than the average "rest of the system". And it's much easier to design an amplifier with vanishingly-small distortions than it is to design a speaker that has vanishingly-small distortions, even only at one point in space in a particular room.
Sorry. Not trying to be rude, but, regarding that type of info being gold, information like that is often close to useless, to me at least, because a) it might be totally dependent on the rest of their circuit, or b) they might have tried a few guesses and liked that one and then presented it as if it was the result of a rigorous optimization procedure.
Sometimes you might get lucky, I guess. But I would probably spend more time trying to verify if, or figure out why, it might be best than it would take for me to start from scratch and arrive at what was truly best, for whatever I was designing.
Last edited:
Tom, I have deliberately used "bad" speakers to try and see how far one can push this. No, they are not going to deliver window shattering 20Hz notes, or deliver absolutely pristine treble on ultra-simple, audiophile recordings when dead cold - but I don't expect them to ...
But, if I take all the right steps they can deliver the 'you are there' quality that at least a few people like,
... remember, I just went to an audio show where they had plenty of costly, "brilliant" speakers - and I spent a lot of the time inwardly just shaking my head and rolling my eyes ...
In the case of the particular speakers in the story, it didn't work that way. They were being used in a Museum of the Tube demo in which the CD player, the tracks played and the speakers remained the same, but the amps/preamps were swapped. Dynaco, MacIntosh, Scott, Fischer and others. Just a way of demonstrating some famous tube amps.
The remarkable thing was that even tho each amp colored the sound to some extent, the sensation of Real never went away. It's a little hard to describe, but imagine looking at a beautiful scene thru sunglasses of various tints. Tho the tint of the scene may change (and you adapt to it quickly) it always looks real. The change in tint never makes it look like a movie or video.
It was uncanny.
Good point. This is an illustration, for me, that the overall objective is to get a sufficient quality of sound, and one just has to do what it takes to get that. In that scenerio my take is that the CD player was good enough, and the speakers were intrinsically sorted out well enough, and had very high sensitivity and a very benign impedance which made it easy for almost anything to drive them without stressing the electronics - comfortable amp = good sound.
My environment is different: I use speakers of typical senstivity, the amps have to work hard for their living, often running close to clipping - and hence the electronics need to be in good order.
Yep, no worries. The quality of realness is special, and for me is what it's all about - I find 'great Hi-Fi' very irritating or boring.
This is what happens when I put on an ancient recording - which would be a disaster on a 'great Hi-Fi' - I instantly adapt to the 'tint', all I perceive is a group of musicians grooving to the music ...
If you don't mind doing some searching, you'll find some nice measurement snapshots as well.
It was in THIS part of the forum, like 2 or 3 months back.
I am NOT saying it's a great general solution, but for his PSU it seemed to be the best one all around.
I AM saying that proper bypassing can do some good at least, but what I find silly is relegating to the PSU board, i.e. away from the power stage. In my book, any bypassing should be as near to the power stage as possible, preferably right next itwith 1 mm distance in between.
What is "proper" bypassing? I think that depends on the overall power supply design, I don't think there's a single, do-it-all uniform answer. On the other hand, I do believe that any time and effort spent on PSU will improve the overall amp for sure.
Some years ago, I suggested to an Indian gentleman to use 1R in series with a cap. He had zero measuring and test gear, so I told him to use the only instruments he had, his ears. Start from say 220 nF and work your way up, it's likely to be between 220 and 680 nF. But I stressed that this must be iterally from the point the collectors of his output stage start, on top of them, so to speak. He did so and reported that after some trial and error, he pinned it down to 470 nF, which in his view, produced the best top end.
Not one iota of science, but with patience and perseverance, it can be made to work rather well.
Also, a perfect example of an area in which I rely on measurements rather than on my ears alone.
Gootee, I NEVER take offence when someone speaks their mind. Actually, it was my fault, I phrased that comment rather poorly, it came out most incomplete and misleading. Mea culpa!
Actually in that case it was more complicated than, because even the man who owned the system didn't think it was Best in Show. At least at the time.* Even very smart, talented people can get distracted by shiny objects. We're all human. I had the advantage of being young, naive and in the classical music biz - I didn't know what was supposed to be better. Sure, the superior systems had lower lows, higher highs, more dynamic dynamics and so forth. Didn't matter, they didn't sound as much like the real thing, as good as they were.
That's a common thread I find at shows. The systems that sound real to me are always rated high, but never the best. Audio geeks love numbers and superlatives, cool technology, novelty and trends. So many of those systems sound like great Hi-Fi to me, but not like music. It's an important distinction.
*Those speakers went on to be a reference for more than 20 years. I felt validated.
The fundmental idea changed with the economic situation and fashon.
"Way back then", designers were hell bent on delivering a wholesome, seamless audio picture from top to bottom. This lasted to about 1980, when new toys arrived (video, PC) and the audio market started shrinking. Its heyday had passed, and new kids were here. And they wanted shiny, bling, "analytical" mids and "discerning" highs, whatever that means. In the UK, the word "subtle" was misused on a daily basis, implying that the text author had heard something you won't.
By the time HT arrived, it had mostly gone down the drain in the mainstream. Today, audio quality, in my view, lives on the fringes of the industry, in small companies. The big guns are much more concerned with economy than with audio.
When I listen to most moving coil speakers I hear common traits . Even some very cheap drive units are 80 % good devices . Surprisingly the makers put great effort into making them reasonably good . Remembering how OK Bose can sound a line array baffle comes to mind . I will be horribly stingy as I want to know if the box really is the big deal difference . The size will be based on the old Magneplanar SMG a . The size 48 x 19 inch I think ? Does anyone have LF data for them ?
Having looked there might be OK units at $10 a piece . These might do 200 to 15 Khz reasonably flat . They might be driven via TDA 2030 or similar . The bass speaker can be a general purpose 8 or 10 inch about $15 . If using a NAD 3020 as preamp it's spare section drives the bass . As the bass will be free to the air some thought might be required to get it to gel . If I can get the bass unit to cross nice and low so much the better . With it being a small baffler it is doubtful the bass unit will be doing much . What it might do is move a bit of air which would sound great for cinema .
FR 8 8 Ohm 3.3 Inch Fullrange Speaker
http://www.rapidonline.com/pdf/35-1411.pdf
Looking at the polar response gives a small expectation that it will work . I plane to use the TDA 2030 capacitor coupled . This will be both protection and first order filter . The TDA might be arranged to make the most of the HF .
I only get lucky 25% of the time at a guess when throwing a loaded dice this , as it is a cheap project I feel that's a good gamble . If a bit of plywood and a NAD 3020 can give a hint at Magneplanar magic it is worth a try . Where it will fail I suspect is where most moving coil drivers fail . 5 drive units NAD 3020 + chip amp . Bose 901's I am sure are nothing special in the drive unit dept . The box even less so . I ran a Spendor BC1 bass-mid outside the box . Transformed I would say . Remember the Spendor has a good reputation for having an OK box .
Someone said we should not speculate . Robin Marshall was a BBC engineer . Audiomaster the company he worked for well known . If he says the Quad ESL was more about not having a box am I daft to think him right ? If I stopped speculating I think my boss would have a very strong word with me . In my job I will be tougher with myself than here . Money is involved .
I always remember building some horns for headphones when on holiday for the kids . After some tweaks they got rather good .
Having looked there might be OK units at $10 a piece . These might do 200 to 15 Khz reasonably flat . They might be driven via TDA 2030 or similar . The bass speaker can be a general purpose 8 or 10 inch about $15 . If using a NAD 3020 as preamp it's spare section drives the bass . As the bass will be free to the air some thought might be required to get it to gel . If I can get the bass unit to cross nice and low so much the better . With it being a small baffler it is doubtful the bass unit will be doing much . What it might do is move a bit of air which would sound great for cinema .
FR 8 8 Ohm 3.3 Inch Fullrange Speaker
http://www.rapidonline.com/pdf/35-1411.pdf
Looking at the polar response gives a small expectation that it will work . I plane to use the TDA 2030 capacitor coupled . This will be both protection and first order filter . The TDA might be arranged to make the most of the HF .
I only get lucky 25% of the time at a guess when throwing a loaded dice this , as it is a cheap project I feel that's a good gamble . If a bit of plywood and a NAD 3020 can give a hint at Magneplanar magic it is worth a try . Where it will fail I suspect is where most moving coil drivers fail . 5 drive units NAD 3020 + chip amp . Bose 901's I am sure are nothing special in the drive unit dept . The box even less so . I ran a Spendor BC1 bass-mid outside the box . Transformed I would say . Remember the Spendor has a good reputation for having an OK box .
Someone said we should not speculate . Robin Marshall was a BBC engineer . Audiomaster the company he worked for well known . If he says the Quad ESL was more about not having a box am I daft to think him right ? If I stopped speculating I think my boss would have a very strong word with me . In my job I will be tougher with myself than here . Money is involved .
I always remember building some horns for headphones when on holiday for the kids . After some tweaks they got rather good .
No doubt, but I'm ... er ... a little different.
The key reason why everyone is going nuts with filtering the PSU lines is because just about everybody here is deeply convinced that power line filters are an unholy work of the Devil.
I on the other hand, I know for a fact that if done right, they can be a blessing. I am so convinced of that that 11 years ago I started making them, and am pleased to have satisfied customers in 28 countries around the globe.
Hence, my philosophy is simple - get rid of the power line borne junk before it ever gets to the transformer(s). That in itself will bring its benefits on almost any existing PSU inside almost any audio device, however, with varying results, depending on the device construction.
My entire audio, video and PC systems are covered by a system of power line filters ("conditioners") and by default I need MUCH less internal filtering, as my prime enemy is whatever has not been rectified by the full wave bridge rectifiers inside the device. This all ends at about 1 kHz, which is still well inside the range of large electrolytics, which I do not save on. If anything, I tend to be thrifty with them.
I am by no means belittling anyone's efforts at quality filtering, but my own circumstances are such that I need to think differently.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.