Ha ha ! Socialist or communist !
You suggest censoring my comments, yet defend those who are against censoring off topic comments on this thread ?
Last time I looked, this thread was titled "Lightspeed Attenuator a new passive preamp"
Not any other members product or idea.
Differing opinions as to the merits, or otherwise, of Georges design are always welcome and should be encourage IMHO. But, not when they are obviously designed to drive business to another members product, whether it be DIY or not.
As stated before by others, if that's your agenda, why not simply start your own thread ?
Cheers
'Nutz
As stated in another answer, the title of this thread is "Lightspeed Attenuator". If it had been an open discussion of the relative merits of various LDR designs, no problem. But its not and never has been. The fact that George has seen fit to be so honest and open in his dealings with the DIY fraternity comes more from a desire to see people achieve something they would not otherwise have done, and to further the improvement of sound quality in systems in general, rather than any commercial agenda. He is due all the accolades, and then some.
My personal view is that others are using the obvious popularity of this thread to further their own interests/products/reputation. My personal view is that this goes against the spirit of this thread, as established by George in the first place.
No offense to anyone else was intended.
As some (famous or infamous, I don't recall) once said "I'm responsible for what I say. I'm not responsible for how you chose to interpret it"
Cheers
'Nutz
You are welcome to your personal view, but I will decline to thank you for sharing it.
I'll do my best not to be too disappointed
See C. below ....
fo·rum (fôrm, fr-)
n. pl. fo·rums also fo·ra (fôr, fr)
1.
a. The public square or marketplace of an ancient Roman city that was the assembly place for judicial activity and public business.
b. A public meeting place for open discussion.
c. A medium for open discussion or voicing of ideas, such as a newspaper, a radio or television program, or a website.
2. A public meeting or presentation involving a discussion usually among experts and often including audience participation.
3. A court of law; a tribunal.
Cheers
'Nutz
Yikes! Economic theories, excessive Canadian politeness, and now ... definitions.
Guys, ... this is turning into one of those interwebs flaming threads!!1!!
I feel a bit responsible because of my "which are the REAL lightspeed LDRs?" post.
This thread does read a bit funny and it's unclear as to who is pushing what to where with the permission of whom?
So please, can we keep the personal issues out of this thread. I think that if we can get an "ok" from georgehifi and udailey as to the situation then we can move forward.
So, is georgehifi's recounting of the history accurate, udailey?
Then, is the current situation acceptable to both parties? If not, what would be?
Really, I think it is up to them to decide (or to clarify to those of us who are confused) and then we should accept their wishes or start a different thread.
Cheers,
Jeff
Guys, ... this is turning into one of those interwebs flaming threads!!1!!
I feel a bit responsible because of my "which are the REAL lightspeed LDRs?" post.
This thread does read a bit funny and it's unclear as to who is pushing what to where with the permission of whom?
So please, can we keep the personal issues out of this thread. I think that if we can get an "ok" from georgehifi and udailey as to the situation then we can move forward.
So, is georgehifi's recounting of the history accurate, udailey?
Then, is the current situation acceptable to both parties? If not, what would be?
Really, I think it is up to them to decide (or to clarify to those of us who are confused) and then we should accept their wishes or start a different thread.
Cheers,
Jeff
Last edited:
I'm sorry but I dont feel compelled to justify myself or to argue with George on the cue of any other DIYaudio member. If I had a personal argument with George I would keep it personal and he and I have both communicated many times by email. I'm not inclined to justify this argument further so please interpret my silence as my desire not to litter this forum with more vitriol rather than acquiescence to whatever is said and not responded to.
I still can't figure out what the problem is here, or the reason for this 'debate'
other than someone must have been too bored with nothing to do
George got his brand and name protected
and his product happens to be the topic/subject of this thread
thats all there is to it
there is no patent on using LDR's, or leds and resistors for that matter
its all been sorted long time ago
other than someone must have been too bored with nothing to do
George got his brand and name protected
and his product happens to be the topic/subject of this thread
thats all there is to it
there is no patent on using LDR's, or leds and resistors for that matter
its all been sorted long time ago
Back on Topic...
I'm planning to implement a 'Lightspeed' attenuator using Paul Hynes VCCS modules. The context seems to fit; a source with output impedance of about 40ohms and a power amp with input impedance of >50K. I've been successfully using switched passive attenuators for years.
The potential fly in the ointment is that I want to use the attenuators on the input of two monoblock amps. Logistically it is simple enough to build two sets of VCCS modules and if I can even retain the balance function if I use the right L/R input/output in each amp. I want to integrate the attenuators into the amps to keep cabling very short from the output; it's also a lot neater.
The potential problem, compounded by the absence of a visual level readout/meter, is control and keeping the attenuators sync'ed. The IR receivers will operate over +/- 45degrees so, if the amps are 2.5metres apart, I should be able to control both as long as I sit centrally more than 1.25m back and point the IR transmitter straight down the middle. The problem would seem to be if I don't do that.
A not very elegant solution would be a centrally located single IR receiver pod, connected with umbilicals - the problem being that there is a fireplace between the amps. I've also considered using the spare input/output on each VCCS board to display a level, perhaps based on the resistance across an LDR?
I have quickly skimmed the considerable content of this thread so forgive me if this has come up before but I didn't spot it - just seeking thoughts/experiences/observations.
Thanks
Ray
I'm planning to implement a 'Lightspeed' attenuator using Paul Hynes VCCS modules. The context seems to fit; a source with output impedance of about 40ohms and a power amp with input impedance of >50K. I've been successfully using switched passive attenuators for years.
The potential fly in the ointment is that I want to use the attenuators on the input of two monoblock amps. Logistically it is simple enough to build two sets of VCCS modules and if I can even retain the balance function if I use the right L/R input/output in each amp. I want to integrate the attenuators into the amps to keep cabling very short from the output; it's also a lot neater.
The potential problem, compounded by the absence of a visual level readout/meter, is control and keeping the attenuators sync'ed. The IR receivers will operate over +/- 45degrees so, if the amps are 2.5metres apart, I should be able to control both as long as I sit centrally more than 1.25m back and point the IR transmitter straight down the middle. The problem would seem to be if I don't do that.
A not very elegant solution would be a centrally located single IR receiver pod, connected with umbilicals - the problem being that there is a fireplace between the amps. I've also considered using the spare input/output on each VCCS board to display a level, perhaps based on the resistance across an LDR?
I have quickly skimmed the considerable content of this thread so forgive me if this has come up before but I didn't spot it - just seeking thoughts/experiences/observations.
Thanks
Ray
Looks like no one will have a say on this Ray, because what your asking is too hard and complex.
Use a single external box, search eBay (worldwide) for remote volume control and there's any number to choose from, between $30-130 some with level readout. Some of the DIY'ers I know have used these nearly all of them say they are a little course in their action, but hey they come for China and are cheap, some even have mulitple input relay switching. These can be adapted to serve the Lightspeed circuit, just a little surgery to the PCB tracks around the pot needed
Cheers George
Use a single external box, search eBay (worldwide) for remote volume control and there's any number to choose from, between $30-130 some with level readout. Some of the DIY'ers I know have used these nearly all of them say they are a little course in their action, but hey they come for China and are cheap, some even have mulitple input relay switching. These can be adapted to serve the Lightspeed circuit, just a little surgery to the PCB tracks around the pot needed
Cheers George
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply George (and thanks also for the original Lightspeed idea).
I think the execution of the hardware aspect with a pair of monoblocks would be fairly simple, the potential complexity is in the use of. But I do have another trick up my sleeve to keep the attenuation levels balanced - I have a functioning pair of ears!
I could abandon the remote control aspect and use a rotary volume control; if a potentiometer were to be replaced with a switched ladder arrangement then relative level controls could be synced via the switch position.
I have also considered building the lightspeed into my DAC but the compromise would then be the need to use buffers to drive the cables to the power amps - not keen on that route.
I'll think on it more and check out your ebay suggestion.
Ray
I think the execution of the hardware aspect with a pair of monoblocks would be fairly simple, the potential complexity is in the use of. But I do have another trick up my sleeve to keep the attenuation levels balanced - I have a functioning pair of ears!
I could abandon the remote control aspect and use a rotary volume control; if a potentiometer were to be replaced with a switched ladder arrangement then relative level controls could be synced via the switch position.
I have also considered building the lightspeed into my DAC but the compromise would then be the need to use buffers to drive the cables to the power amps - not keen on that route.
I'll think on it more and check out your ebay suggestion.
Ray
Hi Ray-
(BTW, apologies if this is slightly off topic)
I used Paul Haynes VCCS modules- they are very good. I too, was hoping to wire in a level/balance indicators, using analog meters (mainly because it would look cool). The thing that discouraged this idea was the balance changes slightly depending on the level. I have a slight L>R shift as I turn up the volume. So any indicator based on the LDR control R is pointless.
So I just use my ears as the balance indicators.
I agree- centrally located IR's w/ umbilicals seems the easiest and not very elegant way. Could you possibly do some sort of IR repeater from one amp to the other?
-Kent
(BTW, apologies if this is slightly off topic)
I used Paul Haynes VCCS modules- they are very good. I too, was hoping to wire in a level/balance indicators, using analog meters (mainly because it would look cool). The thing that discouraged this idea was the balance changes slightly depending on the level. I have a slight L>R shift as I turn up the volume. So any indicator based on the LDR control R is pointless.
So I just use my ears as the balance indicators.
I agree- centrally located IR's w/ umbilicals seems the easiest and not very elegant way. Could you possibly do some sort of IR repeater from one amp to the other?
-Kent
Sorry I have not got back to you on this earlier Ray. I have been a little busy with a lot of people wanting everything yesterday since returning to work after a recent hernia operation. I still have 391 more e-mails to answer.
Firstly. It is not hard to achieve channel balance, by ear, with the VCCs module, without the use of a digital readout. The balance control is just as fine as the volume control. Digital readout may tell you approx where the balance is electrically but it would not account for any imbalance in acoustic sensitivity from your loudspeakers (few loudspeakers are matched to within 1 dB) or any imbalance caused by room placement or room characteristics should these be asymmetrical.
Your problem with any dual mono infra-red remote application will be line of sight for the receiver sensors. As long as the infra red light level exceeds the input actuation threshold sensitivity of the receiver both VCCS modules should operate correctly. The transmitter IR LEDs are quite powerful so distance will not be an issue in your application. only angle. Hammond manufacture painted Octagonal cases (45 degree angles from face to face) in a wide range of colours (available from Rapid electronics in the UK). These cases are small enough to be usable and large enough to fit the transmitter and a wide variety of push button or joystick switch options. You could modify the transmitter to drive IR LEDs on two faces of the case, in line with your receiver module receiver IC lens, to provide you with a good spread of light coverage. Rapid and other component suppliers also supply panel mounting LED holders that are quite smart cosmetically.
If the angle of reception on the receiver module is still tricky the receiver could be set up in it’s own small cosmetically acceptable enclosure next to the amplifier with an umbilical connection to the VCCS module. This will allow the IR receiver lens to be rotated until you have good line of sight. This is slightly less elegant but not as inelegant as placement over the fireplace would be.
I hope this helps.
Regards
Paul
Firstly. It is not hard to achieve channel balance, by ear, with the VCCs module, without the use of a digital readout. The balance control is just as fine as the volume control. Digital readout may tell you approx where the balance is electrically but it would not account for any imbalance in acoustic sensitivity from your loudspeakers (few loudspeakers are matched to within 1 dB) or any imbalance caused by room placement or room characteristics should these be asymmetrical.
Your problem with any dual mono infra-red remote application will be line of sight for the receiver sensors. As long as the infra red light level exceeds the input actuation threshold sensitivity of the receiver both VCCS modules should operate correctly. The transmitter IR LEDs are quite powerful so distance will not be an issue in your application. only angle. Hammond manufacture painted Octagonal cases (45 degree angles from face to face) in a wide range of colours (available from Rapid electronics in the UK). These cases are small enough to be usable and large enough to fit the transmitter and a wide variety of push button or joystick switch options. You could modify the transmitter to drive IR LEDs on two faces of the case, in line with your receiver module receiver IC lens, to provide you with a good spread of light coverage. Rapid and other component suppliers also supply panel mounting LED holders that are quite smart cosmetically.
If the angle of reception on the receiver module is still tricky the receiver could be set up in it’s own small cosmetically acceptable enclosure next to the amplifier with an umbilical connection to the VCCS module. This will allow the IR receiver lens to be rotated until you have good line of sight. This is slightly less elegant but not as inelegant as placement over the fireplace would be.
I hope this helps.
Regards
Paul
So I just use my ears as the balance indicators.
noticed a balance detection curcuit he other day
I think it could work with both analoge balance meter and/or LED's
Yikes! Economic theories, excessive Canadian politeness, and now ... definitions.
Guys, ... this is turning into one of those interwebs flaming threads!!1!!
I feel a bit responsible because of my "which are the REAL lightspeed LDRs?" post.
This thread does read a bit funny and it's unclear as to who is pushing what to where with the permission of whom?
I want to add 1¢ worth:
I met Uriah Dailey maybe five years ago or so at a regional audio trade show, mostly for small manufacturers and DIYers. He was displaying his system using a Lighter Note passive preamp and other gear. That meeting encouraged me to look at this DIYaudio thread, not the other way around. So at least in my case, it wasn't the popularity of the thread that introduced me to Uriah Dailey, but rather my aquaintence with Uriah Dailey that introduced me to this thread.
Uriah is really, really soft spoken, so much that you really can't tell exactly what he is "promoting." I always sensed that he was trying to be careful about stepping on any toes. Probably more than necessary.
I found Uriah's concern about other's feelings quite refreshing, since there are so many out there ripping off designs and setting up "DIY companies" to clone popular products. That's a pet-peeve of mine, because it is truly theft of hard-earned R&D investment. But Uriah is clearly not doing anything of the sort.
Participation on internet discussion boards like this provides a way for a small business owner to generate goodwill, which can be used to grow a business. It's like free advertising. In my opinion, it's a win-win situation because the casual reader gets free support, and DIYers are able to do their own thing after gaining expert guidance. Of course, the DIYer has to learn enough to know what advice is good, and which of the posts have useful information from experts verses nonsense gibberish from blowhards.
Anyway, I just wanted to say that Uriah Dailey is perhaps the most understated small manufacturer I know. He doesn't promote himself much at all, and it is probably because he is overly sensitive to trash talk on DIYaudio. So be cool with him, he's a good guy.
oh man, does this never end
I think that Uriah Dailey have probably matched and delivered most of the LDR's used here, cheap and faithfully, to all
and even greater that he also happened to gain so much affection for it that he found a way to design his own rather than just copy
I never even notice him these days
but I hope he is still active
I think that Uriah Dailey have probably matched and delivered most of the LDR's used here, cheap and faithfully, to all
and even greater that he also happened to gain so much affection for it that he found a way to design his own rather than just copy
I never even notice him these days
but I hope he is still active
Guys. What is the problem ?
I am new to this-->>> I have questions-->>> I find answers or guides her (thanks to all of you)....
I decided to do Lightspeed Attenuator. Opted for different version of Uriah.
Uriah advised me on steps I should take. And warned me I should do amp before attempting Lighter note.
He has never been upselling anything to me and his advise was part of communal input.
I am new to this-->>> I have questions-->>> I find answers or guides her (thanks to all of you)....
I decided to do Lightspeed Attenuator. Opted for different version of Uriah.
Uriah advised me on steps I should take. And warned me I should do amp before attempting Lighter note.
He has never been upselling anything to me and his advise was part of communal input.
Last edited:
the problems with non-experts...
...is that anyone on the Internet can claim to be one, but how do we know?
Taking swipes at those folks that provide insight into their designs is one of the greatest things about DIYaudio. Personal attacks are why many creative folks simply give up on certain discussion boards.
I don't know Uriah Dailey or George but can tell you this: pitting folks against others is a pretty lame thing to do. Both Uriah and George have provided so much helpful information with no direct commercial gain, one ought to be ashamed of one's behaviour if trying to pitch a fight. How many ways to skin a cat? Too many. And I doubt that either is getting rich selling the LDRs , etc. They choose to provide information voluntarily. So for any and all that seem intent on continuing such nonsense, please stop. You were probably raised better than your actions here might indicate.
As an aside: Wayne please PM me (thanks)
...is that anyone on the Internet can claim to be one, but how do we know?
Taking swipes at those folks that provide insight into their designs is one of the greatest things about DIYaudio. Personal attacks are why many creative folks simply give up on certain discussion boards.
I don't know Uriah Dailey or George but can tell you this: pitting folks against others is a pretty lame thing to do. Both Uriah and George have provided so much helpful information with no direct commercial gain, one ought to be ashamed of one's behaviour if trying to pitch a fight. How many ways to skin a cat? Too many. And I doubt that either is getting rich selling the LDRs , etc. They choose to provide information voluntarily. So for any and all that seem intent on continuing such nonsense, please stop. You were probably raised better than your actions here might indicate.
As an aside: Wayne please PM me (thanks)