It is our choice to accept or refuse anything we read. The reason I edited and re-edited the post multiple times, was because I wanted to use minimum words for maximum content. Did I succeed?
The vibrational influence may be even harder to accept than the difference in resistors sound, but when you once realize its existance, your approach to audio design changes.
The vibrational influence may be even harder to accept than the difference in resistors sound, but when you once realize its existance, your approach to audio design changes.
Peter Daniel said:
if you haven't demonstrated its existence, how can we possibly accept it?
If you could show, convincingly may I add, that damping of electronic devices using aluminum oxide and sil pads has audioable impact of their electronic properties / performance, you would have made a HUGE (no, GIGANTIC) contribution to human being's understanding of electronics.
The fact that we haven't heard of anything remotely close to what you are proclaiming should dampen your enthusiasim a little bit,
But that's not to say that billions of people and millions of scientists couldn't be wrong and you couldn't be right. But the odds aren't exactly in your favor, if you ask me.
millwood said:
if you haven't demonstrated its existence, how can we possibly accept it?
If you could show, convincingly may I add, that damping of electronic devices using aluminum oxide and sil pads has audioable impact of their electronic properties / performance, you would have made a HUGE (no, GIGANTIC) contribution to human being's understanding of electronics.
The fact that we haven't heard of anything remotely close to what you are proclaiming should dampen your enthusiasim a little bit,
But that's not to say that billions of people and millions of scientists couldn't be wrong and you couldn't be right. But the odds aren't exactly in your favor, if you ask me.
I should ask you again, to speak for yourself only.
How possibly on this forum can I demonstrate its existence? I can only suggest its existance and its absolutely up to you to check it out. I assume you didn't do anything in that area yet. If you didn't, you cannot also demonstrate lack of its existance.
It's very easy to critisize and joke about someone elses efforts, like starting a silly thread and quoting others. With that you didn't do any contribution at all, but created conflict. What were the odds for that?
I guess you didn't see that thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17641
I don't care were did you put your amp, as long as you have fun doing that. I also don't understand what issues you have with my comments regarding vibrations. If you don't believe or observe its influence, why are you concerned that I do? I also believe there are other forum members who will make an efort to investigate it further, instead of only joking about it.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17641
I don't care were did you put your amp, as long as you have fun doing that. I also don't understand what issues you have with my comments regarding vibrations. If you don't believe or observe its influence, why are you concerned that I do? I also believe there are other forum members who will make an efort to investigate it further, instead of only joking about it.
During a long stint at boeing aerospace we had to test electronic assys. using vibration on what we called "the shaker".It was a skid that was designed to move the test subjects at frequencies from 1 cps(hertz) to greater than 30K hertz.The circuit was active and monitored while testing.Yes vibrations do cause changes in the response , but these were lets say greater amplitude vibrations, probably much greater than a sound wave (in a normal listening room enviorment) would produce.The greatest effect was on caps, and it was found out that the peaks and dips of the response werent really constant between like circuits.BTW this is a MIL spec requirement that all circuit be burned in for a 24 hr. period then given the shake test.We did find out that a softer potting material gave much better responses but never completly eliminated the out of base line curve response.
ron
ron
Peter, I think that Al2O3 insulators are more
vibration transparent than silpads.
The silpad is a composite of a polymer binder with SiO2 or some other solid material with high heat transfer capacity. Composites usually dampens vibrations quite good, expecially the polymeric part of it.
/rickard
vibration transparent than silpads.
The silpad is a composite of a polymer binder with SiO2 or some other solid material with high heat transfer capacity. Composites usually dampens vibrations quite good, expecially the polymeric part of it.
/rickard
shakey logic
"They more more vibration transparent"
What in the heck does that mean? Ummm.... there are screws holding the device to the chassis as well, aren't there. There might be a couple of other considerations as well, but I don't want to bias or taint Peter's independent R and D, since all his design decisions are independent of information from forum discussions.
"They more more vibration transparent"
What in the heck does that mean? Ummm.... there are screws holding the device to the chassis as well, aren't there. There might be a couple of other considerations as well, but I don't want to bias or taint Peter's independent R and D, since all his design decisions are independent of information from forum discussions.
Attachments
So what is the origin of these vibrations, and why do you want to hear them??
Peter, your hearing borders on superhuman ability. I am not in any position to state that what you hear does not exist, so I am not going to criticize you about it. However, you claim to hear things that I've never heard anyone else say they can hear. Also, since I haven't read all of your 5000+ posts, I don't know how you conduct your listening tests. However, if you, for example, change the feedback resistors, and thereby the gain, and don't volume match two side-by-side amps that are different only in the feedback resistor (i.e. their volume), and listen to them virtually at the same sitting, then your conclusions don't hold any validity to a lot of us, especially when some of the changes you hear don't sound like something that could be audible to mortals.
I realize that you are doing all this for yourself, and aren't concerned about proving anything to us (i.e., if you hear it, that's all that matters), but please don't expect a lot of us to accept these things you hear if you listen to a component, break it down, change something, go back and listen to it later, and suggest there's a change. It just doesn't work like that. Hell, my system changes daily depending on my mental/emotional state before I press "play" (and other unknown reasons), and that's without making ANY changes to the hardware.
pooge said:
I don't care what's the origin of those vibration. As long as they are present, I have to deal with them. Because I can't eliminate them completely, I prefer to tune them and actually get advantage of them. I don't have suprhuman hearing abilities, but your acceptance threshold is probably at very low level.
You can't say that anyone else didn't hear what I'm talking about, because I saw many posts concerning similar issues. I never do any critical comparisons myself alone, but usually with some other people and we share our experiences. And volume levels are usually taken care of with test signals and meters, if you were not sure.
pooge said:
How the heck did you get the idea that I expect the whole lot of you to accept those things. You must be kidding here. I only share my observation and it's up to you how you use it. But only because you don't accept it, you want me to stop posting or share my findings? You must be kidding again.
Peter Daniel said:
for example, you can tell a few reviewers of that and see if they hear; you can also go back to your college electronics books and see if there are some theories / emperical studies on that; etc.
ron clarke said:
Ron: you hit it right on. We are not here to debate if the impact exists or not (it does for sure). We are debate if it is significant enough for others to hear it.
Peter Daniel said:
you don't. For example, you don't need to be concerned about the impact that blackhole in Zeta galaxy may have on your amp; or how different your amp would sound if a dog in Argintina starts to bark at 2am vs. 9pm, to list just a few.
Why? Common sense dictates that they don't raise to the level of any significance.
Peter Daniel said:But only because you don't accept it, you want me to stop posting or share my findings? You must be kidding again.
No. Just the opposite. You have been one of the largest contributors of this forum and we love to hear from you what you are experimenting. It is just that as part of us accepting your R&D, we want to think it a little bit to make sure that it makes sense.
Peter Daniel said:
See my note above. It would have been a tragedy if you did tat.
millwood said:
This thread is not deleted, but only closed and you can still see the irony of it. I'm trying to focus on sound, but it seems that you prefer to focus on science.
Your claiming that talking about sound of resistors is silly only confirms your ignorance in that matter. Even Fred would agree on that.
Peter Daniel said:
I didn't find anything explicit on insulatin pads. but did find the mentioning of an experiment that author did with transformers.
when he moved the transformer from rubber pads to bare metal (less damping), the sound improved;
he then moved the transformer to a sand bag (more damping), the sound improved;
he further moved the transformer to inner tubing (more or less damping?), the sound improved further.
In another experiement, he moved the PCB frmo nylon standoffs to brass standoffs (less damping), the sound improved.
so was he trying to prove that more or less damping gives better sound?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.