"...The flipside of it is however that ..."
Nice website but they may require and editor as the site contains superlative and incoherent language. Perhaps they are a small company and can't afford the big luxuries, or worse they are telling lies and talking trash.
Looks good
but sounds funny 
!
Shawn.
Nice website but they may require and editor as the site contains superlative and incoherent language. Perhaps they are a small company and can't afford the big luxuries, or worse they are telling lies and talking trash.
Looks good
but sounds funny !Shawn.
Mikeks-
The quantity of transistors DEFINITELY manifests in statistical propensity for system failure, and simplicity always reigns supreme in this arena, that is for certain, BUT...
I feel that the statement of transistor quantity/count being reflected in characteristics as assembled is very dependent upon implementation. I would agree in [poorly-implemented] cases of transistors in parallel, or [not-so-well-] matched complementary designs, where PNP's can't pass muster with NPN's and so on, but as a blanket statement this is akin to saying it takes twice as long to accelerate a car with a V-8 as it does a 4-cylinder!
Each transistor in a given design is generally pursuing a particular designation. The fact that in a 32-transistor amplifier, all 32 transistors are probably NOT performing the same task, provides for the potential fallacy of this "choir" statement. The quantity of transistors impedes unity of sound quality in the same way that a secretary impedes the level of accomplishment in the office of the CEO. They simply have different tasks to accomplish and they work in concert. Transistors don't know about each other in a given circuit, except in so far as how many electrons are coming up the pike.
Transistors are like mere lemmings, only more elegant. For example, a cascode-stage transistor is merely "doing what it is told" in controlling voltage at its emitter with low impedance characteristics while forwarding [most of the] emitter current to the collector, and this does not include acting [or even trying to participate in acting] like half of a differential amplifier or common emitter VA, even if such devices are present in the same circuit. My cascode transistors never "steal the thunder" from the DA or VA components, and you can bank on that.
Per the first analogy to which I retort, many transistors won't sound like a choir since we're usually not even expecting them to act like "bass, tenor, alto, soprano". It's more like "musician, sound engineer, light technician, box office agent, conductor, etc.". If this were not true, we could not be remotely productive in combining alternate part numbers in a single design, such as a 2N5210 collector driving a 2N5401, darlington-coupled to a MJE15033.
Happy listening and designing...
The quantity of transistors DEFINITELY manifests in statistical propensity for system failure, and simplicity always reigns supreme in this arena, that is for certain, BUT...
I feel that the statement of transistor quantity/count being reflected in characteristics as assembled is very dependent upon implementation. I would agree in [poorly-implemented] cases of transistors in parallel, or [not-so-well-] matched complementary designs, where PNP's can't pass muster with NPN's and so on, but as a blanket statement this is akin to saying it takes twice as long to accelerate a car with a V-8 as it does a 4-cylinder!
Each transistor in a given design is generally pursuing a particular designation. The fact that in a 32-transistor amplifier, all 32 transistors are probably NOT performing the same task, provides for the potential fallacy of this "choir" statement. The quantity of transistors impedes unity of sound quality in the same way that a secretary impedes the level of accomplishment in the office of the CEO. They simply have different tasks to accomplish and they work in concert. Transistors don't know about each other in a given circuit, except in so far as how many electrons are coming up the pike.
Transistors are like mere lemmings, only more elegant. For example, a cascode-stage transistor is merely "doing what it is told" in controlling voltage at its emitter with low impedance characteristics while forwarding [most of the] emitter current to the collector, and this does not include acting [or even trying to participate in acting] like half of a differential amplifier or common emitter VA, even if such devices are present in the same circuit. My cascode transistors never "steal the thunder" from the DA or VA components, and you can bank on that.
Per the first analogy to which I retort, many transistors won't sound like a choir since we're usually not even expecting them to act like "bass, tenor, alto, soprano". It's more like "musician, sound engineer, light technician, box office agent, conductor, etc.". If this were not true, we could not be remotely productive in combining alternate part numbers in a single design, such as a 2N5210 collector driving a 2N5401, darlington-coupled to a MJE15033.
Happy listening and designing...
Lemmings... choirs... I think of transistors as diodes & switches. What the hell was wrong with my electronics instructors? If I thought there were little critters and small boys in gowns inside those devices I would smash them all open to free them to the world...sorry just taking a wiz. Goodtimes.
If I thought there were little critters and small boys in gowns inside those devices I would smash them all open to free them to the world...sorry just taking a wiz. Goodtimes.
anatech said:Oh My!
The old charge more for less routine.
-Chris
I can't help myself...
"...we use only the biggest silicon wafers we can find in fabs with vintage NOS late 50's silicon processing technology. Our single two junction bipolar transistor displaces 5 cubic cm. The sand for our silicon is achieved by melting polar ice, miles thick down into the surface of the rarest Earth's crust where our Engineers are trained to select the finest granules of sand..."
mikeks, I blame you for my behaviour but it is fun.
Disclaimer: I wrote that not Gamut
Future DIY MONO-BLOCK AMP
haven't wired this 13 ounce bad boy piece of Si up yet, but it ought to pass ALOT of current.... good to .1 ohm load maybe?
And talk about simple...
more power! argh argh
TomWaits said:
I can't help myself...
"...we use only the biggest silicon wafers we can find in fabs with vintage NOS late 50's silicon processing technology. Our single two junction bipolar transistor displaces 5 cubic cm. The sand for our silicon is achieved by melting polar ice, miles thick down into the surface of the rarest Earth's crust where our Engineers are trained to select the finest granules of sand..."
mikeks, I blame you for my behaviour but it is fun.
Disclaimer: I wrote that not Gamut
haven't wired this 13 ounce bad boy piece of Si up yet, but it ought to pass ALOT of current.... good to .1 ohm load maybe?
And talk about simple...
more power! argh argh
Attachments
Kate Bush ...way offfffffffff topic
What made you say that? Are you tracking me on the internet? Chris, you and I have way tooooooooomuch in common.
Kate Bush! Pfew! No one listens to Kate....I love her to pieces...to hell with Peter G. but I love him too!
I'm getting uncomfortable here not really. Guess I'm just making friends.
Cheers,
Shawn.
anatech said:
What made you say that? Are you tracking me on the internet? Chris, you and I have way tooooooooomuch in common.
Kate Bush! Pfew! No one listens to Kate....I love her to pieces...to hell with Peter G. but I love him too!
I'm getting uncomfortable here
not really. Guess I'm just making friends. Cheers,
Shawn.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.