sherelec:
If you want detailed scienfitic data check the following thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66542&perpage=10&highlight=&pagenumber=6
The interesing stuff starts at page 6 or so...
Anybody owning an oscilloscope can find out the truth by themselves, but subjetivists are far too lazy...
If you want detailed scienfitic data check the following thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=66542&perpage=10&highlight=&pagenumber=6
The interesing stuff starts at page 6 or so...
Anybody owning an oscilloscope can find out the truth by themselves, but subjetivists are far too lazy...
Eva,
Thank you so much for pointing me to the above thread. It made my morning. A very good read indeed.
I had a very dear friend who passed away, much too young, 20 years ago. He was the most gifted electronic systems debugger I ever encountered. He left me with the following wisdom:
--- You know // In this business you are never really in trouble unless you can't think of anything else to measure. ---
John Kochan, Sr. Eng., Utica, NY, circa 1984
Thank you so much for pointing me to the above thread. It made my morning. A very good read indeed.
I had a very dear friend who passed away, much too young, 20 years ago. He was the most gifted electronic systems debugger I ever encountered. He left me with the following wisdom:
--- You know // In this business you are never really in trouble unless you can't think of anything else to measure. ---
John Kochan, Sr. Eng., Utica, NY, circa 1984
I just wired a MUR815 rectifier circuit with cap + resistor snubbers.
Why? because I had the parts, and am interested in the subject.
I just took a stab at appropiate values.
Are they wrong? Probably.
Will it blow up, convince my circuit to misbehave? Doubt it.
Will I think it sounds better? Yes - because it's "complicated" and the parts are expensive.
Is it bad that I could be imagining an improvement? No - why would it be a bad thing if I am enjoying something I built?
Would I rather know if it is a verifiable improvement? Certainly.
I saved and read the document mentioned above:
http://www.hagtech.com/pdf/snubber.pdf
I understood about 20% of it.
One year ago I would have understood 3% of it.
I have enjoyed reading this thread and other links.
Audible or not, I am sure snubbers should be calculated correctly to the intended circuit and associated components, in order to accomplish.......in order to serve some purpose.
Many "people" post schematics that employ fast diodes, and then mention....the snubbers I used are XXXnf. (sometimes saying there is a range that can be used).
As a bedroom hobbyist, weekly time is not plentyful, and test equiptment is sparse (but growing!!
).
Plowing through that Hagtech article is possible for me, and the math is a hurdle I can overcome (yikes!)....I just need more time. At 3 hours a night, a week and a pound of coffee might do it.
And it is threads like this will help me decide if I'm up for some snubbber crunching...if it is worth it.....and bring results.
You are not wasting your time debating eachother.
But it is tempting to look for a ready-made answer, when calculating snubbers.
Hmmmm...a snubber calculator?
After all, how will I know if a fast snubbered rectifier sounds better if I cannot build one correctly, and listen for myself? Shall us hobbists take the word of the enlightened few? And what if the few are on opposite sides of the debate table ?
My ears should be the scale-tilter. No?
=RR=
Why? because I had the parts, and am interested in the subject.
I just took a stab at appropiate values.
Are they wrong? Probably.
Will it blow up, convince my circuit to misbehave? Doubt it.
Will I think it sounds better? Yes - because it's "complicated" and the parts are expensive.
Is it bad that I could be imagining an improvement? No - why would it be a bad thing if I am enjoying something I built?
Would I rather know if it is a verifiable improvement? Certainly.
I saved and read the document mentioned above:
http://www.hagtech.com/pdf/snubber.pdf
I understood about 20% of it.
One year ago I would have understood 3% of it.
I have enjoyed reading this thread and other links.
Audible or not, I am sure snubbers should be calculated correctly to the intended circuit and associated components, in order to accomplish.......in order to serve some purpose.
Many "people" post schematics that employ fast diodes, and then mention....the snubbers I used are XXXnf. (sometimes saying there is a range that can be used).
As a bedroom hobbyist, weekly time is not plentyful, and test equiptment is sparse (but growing!!
).Plowing through that Hagtech article is possible for me, and the math is a hurdle I can overcome (yikes!)....I just need more time. At 3 hours a night, a week and a pound of coffee might do it.
And it is threads like this will help me decide if I'm up for some snubbber crunching...if it is worth it.....and bring results.
You are not wasting your time debating eachother.
But it is tempting to look for a ready-made answer, when calculating snubbers.
Hmmmm...a snubber calculator?
After all, how will I know if a fast snubbered rectifier sounds better if I cannot build one correctly, and listen for myself? Shall us hobbists take the word of the enlightened few? And what if the few are on opposite sides of the debate table ?
My ears should be the scale-tilter. No?
=RR=
Do diodes sound different? Sure they do. What's best? It is circuit dependent.
In many modern power supplies -- where we have transformer>diodes>caps, there is very little real power supply isolation. This scheme creates a 1st order filter and a whole lot of garbage gets thru.
If you look at a tube amp supply -- or a typical Pass supply you will see at least a CRC -- 2nd order. CLC, 3rd order... (some generalization here as the inductance in real caps, and the capacitance in real chokes can get you in trouble...
Much of the problem with diodes is that a cap input supply has a short conduction cycle, and when the cap is full you get a big reverse spike. A soft recovery diode should help (a vacuum tube rectifier being one of the best in this regard), as should a snubber ... the best solution (ignoring efficiency, since you need to draw suffiicent current to keep the magnetic field from collapsing) is a choke input filter.
dave
PS: i recall that Nelson commented on this... for the longest time he was in the "the diodes in the bridge don't make a difference" to changing to something more exotic sometime after Peter's posts on the subject because his experiments showed that they sounded better -- just goes to show it is important to keep an open mind. In audio, there are a whole lot more things that we don't know than we do know. (a corallary to that is that there are a lot more things we haven't figured out how to, or even know to, measure than we do measure).
In many modern power supplies -- where we have transformer>diodes>caps, there is very little real power supply isolation. This scheme creates a 1st order filter and a whole lot of garbage gets thru.
If you look at a tube amp supply -- or a typical Pass supply you will see at least a CRC -- 2nd order. CLC, 3rd order... (some generalization here as the inductance in real caps, and the capacitance in real chokes can get you in trouble...
Much of the problem with diodes is that a cap input supply has a short conduction cycle, and when the cap is full you get a big reverse spike. A soft recovery diode should help (a vacuum tube rectifier being one of the best in this regard), as should a snubber ... the best solution (ignoring efficiency, since you need to draw suffiicent current to keep the magnetic field from collapsing) is a choke input filter.
dave
PS: i recall that Nelson commented on this... for the longest time he was in the "the diodes in the bridge don't make a difference" to changing to something more exotic sometime after Peter's posts on the subject because his experiments showed that they sounded better -- just goes to show it is important to keep an open mind. In audio, there are a whole lot more things that we don't know than we do know. (a corallary to that is that there are a lot more things we haven't figured out how to, or even know to, measure than we do measure).
Attachments
Susumu Sakuma uses cheap electrolytics and metal film resistors.
The way I see it, there can only be two reasons to use boutique caps and whatnot.
1. You think you are a better audio designer than Sakuma and thus need better components.
2. You think you are a mediocre audio designer who need all the help you can get in order to keep up with those better than you.
The way I see it, there can only be two reasons to use boutique caps and whatnot.
1. You think you are a better audio designer than Sakuma and thus need better components.
2. You think you are a mediocre audio designer who need all the help you can get in order to keep up with those better than you.
Audionote uses $3000 silver foil and oil capacitors and expensive tantalum film resistors.
The way I see it, there can only be two reasons to use generic caps and whatnot.
1. You think you are a better audio designer than Audionote's and thus don't need better components.
2. You think you are the world's best audio designer who doesn't need any help in order to better those you think lesser than you.
Or maybe we can just call a moratorium on the useless and unproductive ad hominems.
The way I see it, there can only be two reasons to use generic caps and whatnot.
1. You think you are a better audio designer than Audionote's and thus don't need better components.
2. You think you are the world's best audio designer who doesn't need any help in order to better those you think lesser than you.
Or maybe we can just call a moratorium on the useless and unproductive ad hominems.
rdf:
Or 3. You think that it's possible to design excellent amplifiers that are tolerant of components that are perfectly competent for the task but not audiophile jewelry. Your design aims do not include impressing Stereophile or whomever.
I suspect there's a 4, 5, and 6, too, it's just that I'm a number 3 and didn't want to be shouldered out of all the fun.
Or 3. You think that it's possible to design excellent amplifiers that are tolerant of components that are perfectly competent for the task but not audiophile jewelry. Your design aims do not include impressing Stereophile or whomever.
I suspect there's a 4, 5, and 6, too, it's just that I'm a number 3 and didn't want to be shouldered out of all the fun.
You're right. Too many factors. Too many components. After all, we know that Polypropylene and Teflon caps do some things better than all other materials and paper caps have other qualities. And we know that silver has lower resistance than copper. Heck, Klangfilm used silver. Albeit in their ceramic caps. And I bet it was for reliability and not sound.
Still I find it presumptuous to use botique components. I do not count the MUR860 as a boutique component. Nor do I question that it can make a difference. I'm a vinyl junkie. I'm 100 pct subjectivist, 0 pct objectivist. I'm a subject, not an object. Females are object.
Still I find it presumptuous to use botique components. I do not count the MUR860 as a boutique component. Nor do I question that it can make a difference. I'm a vinyl junkie. I'm 100 pct subjectivist, 0 pct objectivist. I'm a subject, not an object. Females are object.
When I posted a previous link, I had those two post specifically in mind; read it and maybe you'll learn something:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=102326#post102326
jcarr said:
jcarr said:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=102326#post102326
SY said:
We are getting a little OT here -- but I note the recent Stereophile review of a $3,800 line conditioner in which the reviewer indicated that he had taken metallurgy in college and grad school and saw no basis for the claim that cryogenic treatment of the power conditioner would have any effect, same reviewer went on to wax erotic on the device's benefit -- yes Hubbell connectors are nice, that's why hospitals use them.
SY said:
It all depends on the definitions of excellence, tolerance, and task of course but generally yes. I also feel an excellent amp can be further improved with careful part selection.
Exclusively classifying parts selection as 'audiophile jewlery' places way too much weight in the social aspect (and I only buy Stereophile for the pictures.) Some parts I currently prefer - PRP resistors and Russian silver mica for coupling - are relatively cheap and have all the boutique status of MC Hammer pants. Arriving at those preferences was a painful process. I absolutely detest parts cooking and was dismayed at the difference, for example, between the stock Elna coupling cap in a Benchmark DAC 1 and Black Gates. It's not anything I want. In my perfect world RatShack would carry everything needed to build the best amplifier of which I'm capable but experience tells me it just isn't so.
To be clear though, topology and construction come first. Part selection is just one element. $3000 caps in a poor circuit makes a poor $3100 amp.
When I read this Forum, I don't ask anybody for explanation and I don't demand a proof.
I just choose what makes sense to me and if I have enough time, I'll check it out in my own audio system: if it works or indeed makes a difference.
Because I want to "think for myself, do things for myself, and experience things for myself".
After all, this is the diyAudio Forum - projects by the fanatics for the fanatics, and not a scientific discussion board, although it seems like many forgot about it already....
And although I may appreciate posts from Eva or out new member sherelec, I certainly don't appreciate comments like "subjetivists are far too lazy..." or "sometimes people just doesn't want to learn..." or one "guru" told another "guru"
I just choose what makes sense to me and if I have enough time, I'll check it out in my own audio system: if it works or indeed makes a difference.
Because I want to "think for myself, do things for myself, and experience things for myself".
After all, this is the diyAudio Forum - projects by the fanatics for the fanatics, and not a scientific discussion board, although it seems like many forgot about it already....
And although I may appreciate posts from Eva or out new member sherelec, I certainly don't appreciate comments like "subjetivists are far too lazy..." or "sometimes people just doesn't want to learn..." or one "guru" told another "guru"
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.