Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Chip Amps Amplifiers based on integrated circuits

So I did try all those different potentiometers
So I did try all those different potentiometers
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th September 2004, 01:19 PM   #1
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default So I did try all those different potentiometers

Recently I've been experimenting a bit with different pots. Here's what I tried (from left): Taiwan Alpha, Panasonic, Nobel, PEC carbon, discreet switcher based on fixed series Vishay/tantalum and switching Holcos for shunt.

None of those pots is completely neutral and all of them show their sonic signature when placed at amp's input.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pot1.jpg (88.9 KB, 13267 views)
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 01:29 PM   #2
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Default Re: So I did try all those different potentiometers

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
None of those pots is completely neutral and all of them show their sonic signature when placed at amp's input.
I suppose that you are comparing pots/switches with the same impedance?
Let's say, are they all 50k log?

With no input buffer (just a pot as a "passive pre") what works best is 10k.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 01:34 PM   #3
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
So deciding on using one or the other will greatly depend on personal taste (and the rest of the system).

Panasonic was the first one I evaluated. It has very natural sound and it is a rather musical pot. It's signature reminds of Panasonic FC capacitors: involving presentation. The only reservation I had here was the way it was softening the top end. But again, in some systems it may be desirable.

Nobel sounds cleaner than Panasonic and has more high frequency extention, however it's not as musical. If you fancy musicality, you'd better suited with Panasonic, if detail and speed is your thing, Nobel may be the right choice.

Two days ago I received this Alpha pot from Jaycar in New Zeland. As you see, it's very tiny and it could easily fit in a Walkman. It made very favourable first impression. It's not completely neutral, as it shows some slight coloration in upper midrange, but it's not very obvious. Also the detail is very good, but not as good as straight wire.

What I noticed comparing to Nobel, was slight loss of clarity and a bit less of separation and layering of instruments. It seemed that Alpha may had touch more bass

None of those pots was better than a switching volume attenuator built from discreet resistors.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 01:35 PM   #4
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Re: Re: So I did try all those different potentiometers

Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm


I suppose that you are comparing pots/switches with the same impedance?
Let's say, are they all 50k log?

With no input buffer (just a pot as a "passive pre") what works best is 10k.
Yes indeed. All of them are 50k, log.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:04 PM   #5
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
I left the best for last.

Recently, a forum member suggested to me trying the carbon pot from Precision Electronic Components. Digi-Key carries mono versions of the pot, but since the company is located in Toronto, I didn't have problem with sourcing few samples of a stereo version.

After I substituted my previous reference (discreet switcher) with this carbon pot, I was simply blown away.

None of the previously described potentiometers, or even the switching attenuator, had the amount of musicality and coherence that this carbon pot presents. I like it a lot, as it actually sounds like music. The other attenuators are more mechanical in character, what makes music sound more artificial.

After longer periods of evaluation, I noticed that the signature of this pot is pretty strong. It shows some tubiness, or "mushy" sound. For instance, Nobel sounds much cleaner, but again, less involving. There is no loss in detail however, and the resolution in highs is very good.

I tried to eliminate somehow this signature and soldered 22k nude Vishay parallel to IN/ OUT pins on the pot. Indeed it reduced the tuby sound, made things more bright, but the musicality disappeared somewhat as well. I guess it's better to leave it as it is.

It is my current pot of choice, and actually I have a hrad time deciding if I prefer listening with ML380 premap, or just this carbon pot.

As good as the preamp is (it's a modified unit) it still has some traces of 'processed' music. Listening to pot directly makes the presentation more spontaneous and more involving.

After saying that, and after some cosultations with friends, nothing beats S&B TVC line stage so far, none of those pots and probably not even modified ML380 preamp

Here's the pic of the inside of PEC pot.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pot2.jpg (52.8 KB, 11759 views)
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:10 PM   #6
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
This is what I've been told with regards to their build quality:

Quote:
Instead of cheap silkscreened resistive elements, they use a hot molded
carbon element, the same hot molded process used for making carbon comp
fixed resistors.

Instead of using silkscreened conductor paths with the terminals riveted to
them (because you can't solder to the silver-loaded epoxy), they use solid
one-piece terminals.

Instead of using spring metal for the wiper conductor, they use a solid
molded slug of carbon. It fits into a molded piece of plastic which is
attached to a spring metal disc to provide the contact pressure.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pot3.jpg (61.2 KB, 10317 views)
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:11 PM   #7
ThorstenL is offline ThorstenL  Germany
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Konnichiwa,

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
None of the previously described potentiometers, or even the switching attenuator, had the amount of musicality and coherence that this carbon pot presents. I like it a lot, as it actually sounds like music. The other attenuators are more mechanical in character, what makes music sound more artificial.
Try this:

Use a 1M Linear law version of the Carbon track pot you use.

Use 33-47k Law Fake resistor across out & gnd, use whatever sounds best to you, Carbon composition would be my take.

If you where still using the IGC Circuit with a 10K input Impedance I'd recommend simply a 250K Lin version of this pot, input impedance lawfakes by itself....

Sayonara
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:18 PM   #8
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Everytime I put a good pre instead of the passive pot I hear improvements.
Clearer, more definition, real harmonics.
I've tested this too many times.
Last week again.
A pot as a passive pre.
Then, an op-amp after it.
Bingo.
An open window.
The pot was the same, I've just put a TPA6120 after it.
Yes, a good pre can be just as simple as using the right op-amp.
Too many parts and too long a signal path just throws it all away.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:21 PM   #9
AR2 is offline AR2  United States
Master Burner
 
AR2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Francisco, California
Hello Peter,
Thank you for taking the time to share with us your findings. Funny enough, I was just thinking about getting some pots for my experimental rig with Behringer xover.
I always find your posts very interesting, detailed and informative, and I always enjoy reading them.
Stay well
AR2
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:25 PM   #10
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm
Everytime I put a good pre instead of the passive pot I hear improvements.
Clearer, more definition, real harmonics.
I've tested this too many times.
Last week again.
A pot as a passive pre.
Then, an op-amp after it.
Bingo.
An open window.
The pot was the same, I've just put a TPA6120 after it.
Yes, a good pre can be just as simple as using the right op-amp.
Too many parts and too long a signal path just throws it all away.
It is my observation that a quality of the pot IS very critical (when placed at amp's input). It may make or brake the sound of the amp. When properly chosen it will will sound cleaner and more natural than even a very good active stage.

So far I didn't find the active stage I can live with in a long run. But I can live with a good pot. And as I said already, the passive TVC stage is probably most "pure" sounding of them all.

In closing, one can't argue about the value Alpha pot offers. For the money, it's a bargain, I think.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:37 PM   #11
x. onasis is offline x. onasis
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYS
Any idea where others may source this pot? Or maybe series and style #'s for a search?
__________________
onasis
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:43 PM   #12
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by x. onasis
Any idea where others may source this pot? Or maybe series and style #'s for a search?
Which one?
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:50 PM   #13
x. onasis is offline x. onasis
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYS
The carbon pot from Precision Electronic Components
__________________
onasis
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 02:54 PM   #14
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Here it is: http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T043/1010.pdf

I was using KA series, and DK carries only mono version.

Attached company info.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg pec.jpg (39.0 KB, 6383 views)
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 03:07 PM   #15
x. onasis is offline x. onasis
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYS
Are these made to order?

Minimun orders apply.
__________________
onasis
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 03:19 PM   #16
bcherry is offline bcherry  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
bcherry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Send a message via Yahoo to bcherry
Hi Peter,
Glad to read your report and quite a coincidence as I've also been testing pots for a project, all carbon linear 1m and law faked. They replace an Alps Blue in a tubed headphone amp. By comparison the Alps is shrill and thinned out. The Alpha (not same one you tested) is more full-bodied but a little 'smudged' around the edges. Another no-name bought at a radio parts shop was similar. But I was bowled over with the PEC 1m linear + tants. It is more dynamic, detailed, transparent and full sounding than the Alps by far. I wouldn't have believed it.
Brian
__________________
Disclaimer: I may or may not offer for sale items mentioned in this thread, and if I do, I may or may not make a profit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 03:24 PM   #17
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by x. onasis
Are these made to order?

Minimun orders apply.
Maybe. We managed to obtain samples within a week.


Quote:
Originally posted by bcherry
but a little 'smudged' around the edges
That's exactly expression I was looking for.

Yes, the PEC pot is definitely something special. I didn't expect that a pot can sound like that. You know, I was always using those plastic types

My thanks go to SE, for pointing it out to me.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 04:10 PM   #18
rdf is offline rdf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
rdf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: big smoke
Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
You know, I was always using those plastic ones
Have you tried the metal ones, a wirewound? A ten turn with vernier dial gives one thousand defined volume settings so the fact wirewounds are normally linear taper isn't a real disadvantage. Plenty of resolution remains at the bottom end of the scale. To my ear precise channel balance is critical to achieving a proper sense of space and for that reason can't live with discrete resistor attenuators. I also like the theoretical aspect that audio current never leaves metal and doesn't pass through carbon or plastic though I can't claim it's an audible advantage.
I've used a Bourns 10k's in a passive (with hot and ground switching pgm selector) for ten years now and never felt the need to change it. My impression is the pot does have a sound, midly subtractive and benign but no where near the effect I hear by changing out a coupling cap or interconnects. I'd be curious if anyone else here uses or has experience with them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 04:29 PM   #19
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Quote:
Originally posted by rdf
My impression is the pot does have a sound, midly subtractive and benign but no where near the effect I hear by changing out a coupling cap or interconnects.
Whyzzat that everybody with standalone passive "pre-amps" always end up spending big money on interconnects?
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 06:08 PM   #20
Nuuk is offline Nuuk  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Nuuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, SW England
Quote:
To my ear precise channel balance is critical to achieving a proper sense of space and for that reason can't live with discrete resistor attenuators.
I don't know what attenuators you have listened to but presume they must have used un-matched 5% resistors (or worse).

An attenauator using 1% metal films will give you better channel matching than virtually any pot!
__________________
The truth need not be veiled, for it veils itself from the eyes of the ignorant.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 06:59 PM   #21
ThorstenL is offline ThorstenL  Germany
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Konnichiwa,

Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm
Whyzzat that everybody with standalone passive "pre-amps" always end up spending big money on interconnects?
Big Money?

My best Interconnect can be made per 1m pair for under £7/$14.

For that you get goldplated fine silver (99.995%) wire, "zero connector" RCA Plugs and Airdielectic with phantastically low capacitance to boot.

Takes less than 15 Minute per pair with a modicum of practice.

Big Money?

Sayonara
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 07:36 PM   #22
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Also all interconnects I'm using were built by me, and cost me next to nothing.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 08:14 PM   #23
grataku is offline grataku  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: -
Peter,
I have been using the sealed carbon pots from Allen-Bradley (AB), that is equivalent to what you shown, just better, for the past 20 years. Nice to return to the forum and see that soo much as evolved in my absence.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 08:18 PM   #24
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Hi Paolo,

I understand you didn't finish your APOX
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 08:56 PM   #25
grataku is offline grataku  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: -
How do you know that?
I finished the apox already, I never built the preamp for it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 09:07 PM   #26
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Quote:
Originally posted by Kuei Yang Wang
Konnichiwa,
Big Money?
I was talking commercial products.
Not everyone I know is into DIY...
I also make my interconnects.

The point I was trying to make is that for a standalone passive pre (based on a pot or switch) you need as short and as good interconnects as you can.
High impedance...
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 09:17 PM   #27
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
If I'm using passive pot only, I mount it directly on RCA input jacks (in a special attachment module), so there's only one pair of interconnects involved anyway.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 09:36 PM   #28
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
I know, Peter.
I was talking about a standalone passive pre, because of this post:

Quote:
Originally posted by rdf
I've used a Bourns 10k's in a passive (with hot and ground switching pgm selector) for ten years now and never felt the need to change it. My impression is the pot does have a sound, midly subtractive and benign but no where near the effect I hear by changing out a coupling cap or interconnects. I'd be curious if anyone else here uses or has experience with them.
Of course, the quality of the interconnects makes much difference here.
This doesn't happen with a good active pre, with a low impedance output.
I use 50 ohms output impedance on my pre, which btw has good output current, and testing interconnects with this is a fantasmagoric experience.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 10:04 PM   #29
highbias is offline highbias  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Salt Lake City, Ut
So Peter,

What "IS" sonic neutrality and do you really believe that it exists? i don't believe it exists at all in the audio world. So everythiong we listen too is going to have its own sonic signature.... its all a matter of if you like the sonic signature of something and can live with it or not.

Mark
__________________
Now I too Have a Cool Screen Name!
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th September 2004, 10:13 PM   #30
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by highbias
So Peter,

What "IS" sonic neutrality and do you really believe that it exists? i don't believe it exists at all in the audio world. So everythiong we listen too is going to have its own sonic signature.... its all a matter of if you like the sonic signature of something and can live with it or not.

Mark
Yes, I agree and I don't think sonic neutrality exist. There used to be comparisons to straight wire, but in reality, even 2" of wire have the sound of its own, IME.

So, whatever seems like your 'thing' is your escape from lack of neutrality.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 03:18 AM   #31
metalman is offline metalman  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
metalman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Peter,

you mentioned that all the other pots weren't up to the performance of a stepped attenuator, but how close was the PEC to one?

Terry
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 03:37 AM   #32
rdf is offline rdf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
rdf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: big smoke
Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm


Whyzzat that everybody with standalone passive "pre-amps" always end up spending big money on interconnects?

I make my own tape-type low capacitance cables. Normally around $20 CDN, or in international currency a case of beer. On second thought, measured in those dollars..
Passives aren't necessarily operating high impedance. It's system dependent. My amp is a Mullard 3-3 in protoype (waiting forever for Allied to ship the ASC caps) which has very high input sensitivity on the order of 100 mv. The pot usually sits around 10 on a scale of 1000 (10-turn vernier dial.) That works out to 100 ohm output impedance for a 10k pot, purely resisitive.
I find a passive's biggest flaw is the relatively low impedance load it presents to source equipment. My old tube phono pre, for example, doesn't appear to like it much.

Quote:
Originally posted by Nuuk


An attenauator using 1% metal films will give you better channel matching than virtually any pot!

The fault lies with source material. In my room recordings with naturally recorded ambience snaps into focus with the smallest L/R tweaks. The 2 dB adjustment typical of a rotary discrete is too course for many recordings. The affect can be especially amazing on those with synthetic space like matrix surround movies or the Q-Sound on Roger Waters' "Amused to Death". The latter, in my case heard through a pair of small full range drivers, the correct balance permits the sound field to wrap slightly behind the listening chair on both sides and rise over your head on some effects.
You'd also be surprised how linear some wirewounds can be sourced. The MH-22B on the page below is available in 0.25% versions, for a price. Not that I think the extra money will be audible.

http://www.alliedelec.com/catalog/pf.asp?FN=1063.pdf

Hmmm, it looks as if I'm the only one using ten-turns.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 04:00 AM   #33
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by metalman
Peter,

you mentioned that all the other pots weren't up to the performance of a stepped attenuator, but how close was the PEC to one?

Terry
The other pots didn't have the resolution the stepped attenuator was offering.

OTOH, the stepped attenuator didn't have the musicality that PEC pot offers. The resolution of PEC is equal or better than other pots.

Please be warned that PEC is not neutral. It has certain signature, which you either like or not. A friend of mine, who prefers Nobel, calls it "mushy" sound, but I was not bothered by that at all.

When changing from stepped attenuator to PEC carbon pot, my first impression was: "Wow, this sounds like real music"

PS: As mentioned previously, I wanted to reduce that certain coloration, and added a parallel Vishay (nude) S102 resistor (between IN and OUT pins on the pot). Although it helped a bit, it also took away that certain musicality and rightness to the sound. I removed the resistor.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 05:11 AM   #34
Variac is offline Variac  Costa Rica
diyAudio Editor
 
Variac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Francisco, USA San Josť, Costa Rica
So I did try all those different potentiometers
Hey rdf,
I've always been intrigued by 10 turn pots and their (optional)v. vernier dials. Noew that you have give the OK, maybe you have will have company soon....
__________________
"The geek shall inherit the earth"
2017 Burning Amp is November 12 in S.F. Thread here on diyAudio:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/clubs...francisco.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 05:54 AM   #35
bcherry is offline bcherry  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
bcherry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Send a message via Yahoo to bcherry
stepped compared to carbon:

I don't find the linear version mushy at all, nor wanting for detail, but I will order some 50K log to compare. Another interesting thing is even at low listening levels it has dynamics, similar but not quite as good as TVC.

Overall in my headamp I'd rate as follows:
1. TVC
2. PEC
3
4
5 stepped attenuator
6
7
8
9
10 Alps Blue.

Brian
__________________
Disclaimer: I may or may not offer for sale items mentioned in this thread, and if I do, I may or may not make a profit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 08:07 AM   #36
Nuuk is offline Nuuk  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Nuuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, SW England
Quote:
The fault lies with source material. In my room recordings with naturally recorded ambience snaps into focus with the smallest L/R tweaks. The 2 dB adjustment typical of a rotary discrete is too course for many recordings. The affect can be especially amazing on those with synthetic space like matrix surround movies or the Q-Sound on Roger Waters' "Amused to Death". The latter, in my case heard through a pair of small full range drivers, the correct balance permits the sound field to wrap slightly behind the listening chair on both sides and rise over your head on some effects.
So what you are saying is that you have separate controls for left and right channel to get your balance correct with different material.

If I ever wanted to go back to fiddling with two controls each time I played a different piece of music (which I don't), I would still do it with a stepped attenuator as it is not poblem to make one (or two in this case) with 1 db steps.
__________________
The truth need not be veiled, for it veils itself from the eyes of the ignorant.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 08:15 AM   #37
Nuuk is offline Nuuk  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Nuuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset, SW England
Quote:
The other pots didn't have the resolution the stepped attenuator was offering.
Peter, you are not alone here, but people in this thread have nonchalantly compared pots to 'the stepped attenuator' as though the latter was a fixed reference, like the gold standard!

There are many variations of stepped attenuator depending on design, switch type, and type of resistors used.

Quote:
OTOH, the stepped attenuator didn't have the musicality that PEC pot offers.
I find stepped attenuators using all MF resistors do lack a bit of musicality but put some carbon fim types on the input and things improve a lot.
__________________
The truth need not be veiled, for it veils itself from the eyes of the ignorant.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 08:33 AM   #38
analog_sa is offline analog_sa  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
analog_sa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cascais
So I did try all those different potentiometers
Quote:
5 stepped attenuator
Interesting list Brian. I wonder why the stepped attenuator is so low down the list. Are the resistors metal films? Is it possible the carbon pots sound better than any fixed value resistor? Even carbon composition?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 09:39 AM   #39
bcherry is offline bcherry  Hong Kong
diyAudio Member
 
bcherry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Send a message via Yahoo to bcherry
Quote:
Originally posted by analog_sa


Interesting list Brian. I wonder why the stepped attenuator is so low down the list. Are the resistors metal films? Is it possible the carbon pots sound better than any fixed value resistor? Even carbon composition?
My expreience is with SMD and Dale types, maybe not the best-of-breed. There is no doubt the stepped has greater transparency, but compared to the linear PEC, not that much. The stepped att thin-down the music, to my ears. The PEC linear is much more musical. So in totality, I rate the PEC much higher. I'm sure others may hear it differently.
For me it's a gobsmacker because I reckoned carbon pots to be fluffy, diffuse and noisy sounding.

Brian
__________________
Disclaimer: I may or may not offer for sale items mentioned in this thread, and if I do, I may or may not make a profit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 11:17 AM   #40
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Red face Pots...

Musicality, transparency, dynamics...
Each one has his priorities and tastes.

We will never find out what's the best pot.
This is like discussing op-amps...
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 12:44 PM   #41
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by Nuuk


Peter, you are not alone here, but people in this thread have nonchalantly compared pots to 'the stepped attenuator' as though the latter was a fixed reference, like the gold standard!

There are many variations of stepped attenuator depending on design, switch type, and type of resistors used.
I thought my stepped attenuator presented in this thread was rather good. It features fixed (so it's permanently in a signal path, without additional switching) 5K resistor consisting of 10k tantalum and 10k Vishay S102 (in parallel) and old type Holcos being switched in shunt position only.

I tried some carbon resistors before (not too many though), but I never liked their sound. They were veiled and dull, sort of like Cat5 cable.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 01:39 PM   #42
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Every resistor has a sonic signature.
On the stepped attenuator, even que quality of the switch may be an issue...

A pot is a variable resistor.
It can be made to have good quality too.

When comparing a pot with a stepped attenuator you are only comparing that pot with that stepped attenuator, particularly the switch and resistors used.
We can't generalize the results.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 01:44 PM   #43
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Actually I was also inserting the pots between the output of my passive TVC preamp and the amp. This gives a better idea of how neutral a given attenuator is.

As to the part about every resistor having sonic signature, I'm quite puzzled the other member didn't observe much difference between two versions of the kit
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 01:54 PM   #44
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
As to the part about every resistor having sonic signature, I'm quite puzzled the other member didn't observe much difference between two versions of the kit
The two versions of the kit may have a small sonic difference between each other.
I suppose it's not night and day?
It may pass unnoticed to several people.
That member admitted that the BGs need to -in.

I don't know what's the point, as we are talking volume pots and it seams quite a different matter to me.
Volume pots make a huge difference, much more than a "red" or a "green" type resistor on the amp's circuit.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 02:08 PM   #45
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm

I don't know what's the point, as we are talking volume pots and it seams quite a different matter to me.
Volume pots make a huge difference, much more than a "red" or a "green" type resistor on the amp's circuit.
The point is that I started this thread, and I can discuss anything I want here.

Sometimes two (different) resistors make bigger difference than two different pots, especially if they are inserted in a feedback loop.

Besides, talking about resistors and sound of resistors, is pretty much on topic here.

Also talking about perception and ability to distinguish different sounds is part of the topic here.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 02:43 PM   #46
Vikash is offline Vikash  United Kingdom
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
Vikash's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Quote:
I'm quite puzzled the other member didn't observe much difference between two versions of the kit
Well the difference was more apparent to my friend who was auditioning with me. Perhaps it's just my ears, but I have a sneaky suspicion that the speakers we were using just didn't have enough resolution to show up the differences easily, especially since after the comparisson we switched to better speakers and heard much more detail (albeit with a different (not better) amp).

Quote:
I suppose it's not night and day?
Precisely. And I don't think it possibly can be.
__________________
"The human mind is so constituted that it colours with its own previous conceptions any new notion that presents itself for acceptance." - J. Wilhelm. (But I still think mine sounds better than yours.)
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 02:45 PM   #47
carlosfm is offline carlosfm  Portugal
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Peter, you're right, it's your thread.
You can help "the other member" posting your impressions of the two kits on his thread.

Back to pots then.
You agree that you are comparing with your stepped attenuator, then?
Because some members misunderstood what you said, I think you are not generalizing that the PEC pot is better than a stepped attenuator.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 02:49 PM   #48
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by Vikash

Well the difference was more apparent to my friend who was auditioning with me. Perhaps it's just my ears, but I have a sneaky suspicion that the speakers we were using just didn't have enough resolution to show up the differences easily, especially since after the comparisson we switched to better speakers and heard much more detail (albeit with a different (not better) amp).
That's perfectly understandable. But I also suspect that when listening to unknown amp it is much harder to distinguish the difference, when actually comparing amps knowing which one is playing.

Well, some people might say this is not a correct way of detecting differences, but I am not into science and I couldn't perform my comparisons in blinded method. My perception is simple blinded then too, and I would be much less efficient in telling one from the other.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 02:53 PM   #49
Peter Daniel is offline Peter Daniel  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
So I did try all those different potentiometers Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Quote:
Originally posted by carlosfm
Back to pots then.
You agree that you are comparing with your stepped attenuator, then?
Because some members misunderstood what you said, I think you are not generalizing that the PEC pot is better than a stepped attenuator.
Of course, I was only comparing what was in a picture. Other stepped attenuators might be much better and possibly outperform PEC pot. That should be clear to everybody.

I would be interested myself in some other well sounded switching units.

To some people though, it seems like any stepped attenuator is a key to better sound. It's simply not the case and in many instances a regular pot may sound actually better.
__________________
To order kits contact me through forum mail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th September 2004, 03:17 PM   #50
rdf is offline rdf  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
rdf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: big smoke
Quote:
Originally posted by Variac
... maybe you have will have company soon....
In San Fran it should be easy to score a couple from a surplus house to see how you like them. The only thing I consistently believe I hear bypassing the passive and feeding the amp directly with the DAC is a slight increase in treble energy. I don't know if it's the wirewound specifically or the passive's extra interconnects, switching and internal wiring which causes the effect.
Looking forward to hearing what you hear!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


So I did try all those different potentiometersHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Potentiometers - USA Brit01 Tubes / Valves 8 8th August 2009 12:14 AM
potentiometers zahlm Parts 1 15th April 2004 05:43 AM
Potentiometers slogan2112 Solid State 2 19th December 2003 06:54 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:13 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.79%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki