John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 2723 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

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 4th September 2012, 12:32 AM   #27221
fas42 is online now fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua_G View Post
On top of that, I found out that meaningful listening evaluations need prolonged listening. Few times it happened to me that when I evaluated various pieces of gear on my audio setup, on first listening it sounded good. After few listening sessions, on few consecutive days, some faults to sound quality emerged. Therefore, a brief, one time listening evaluations aren't the way for meaningful sound quality evaluation.
Interesting, completely the other way for me. I have a collection of really "nasty" recordings, as in that on most systems they sound pretty horrendous, unlistenable to in an enjoyable way, and it takes mere seconds to assess a completely unknown setup this way -- the faults absolutely scream at you; I'm speaking of the components working as a complete entity, not the recording ...

Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 01:12 AM   #27222
morinix is offline morinix  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by fas42 View Post
I have a collection of really "nasty" recordings......
Care to grace us with some examples?
__________________
Robert
Lounge Audio
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 01:20 AM   #27223
diyAudio Member
 
Joshua_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Small village, Israel
Quote:
Originally Posted by fas42 View Post
Interesting, completely the other way for me. I have a collection of really "nasty" recordings, as in that on most systems they sound pretty horrendous, unlistenable to in an enjoyable way, and it takes mere seconds to assess a completely unknown setup this way -- the faults absolutely scream at you; I'm speaking of the components working as a complete entity, not the recording ...

Frank
Well, I spoke about evaluating gear on my own setup.
When a piece of gear doesn't sound good, it's quite obvious very soon. It takes prolonged listening to find out that something really sounds good, without drawbacks.

I didn't like the majority of other setups I heard. Indeed, at times it takes few minutes to find out that you don't like a certain setup. On one case I found it out only after a whole listening session. Only after the second listening session I could pin point the reason for it: it is a setup (a fairly expensive one, about 4 times than my own setup) which has a great "Wow! Effect", but all music on it sound the same, and it is very far from being musical.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 01:29 AM   #27224
RNMarsh is offline RNMarsh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
RNMarsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 2457 Cascade Trail; Cool, CA. 95614
Default Ferrous metals increase thd -

Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronautical View Post
Mr. Curl, is that because steel or ferric metal can be excited into being a magnet in the presence of a magnetic field...thereby fixing one problem and spawning others?
Current flowing thru ferrous metals create a non-linear Z which translates into distortion... Ferrous metals within 2-3cm (1 inch) of a signal carrying wire is sufficient to measure the thd increase.

Thus, keep ferrous metals like the chassis might be - 1 inch or more away from the signal wires and pcb/circuitry. And, of course dont, therefore, use parts with ferrous metals in them.

The research done on this came from Japan... I think I recall who/company but not sure. -Dick Marsh

Last edited by RNMarsh; 4th September 2012 at 01:35 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 01:41 AM   #27225
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bryant, Arkansas
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNMarsh View Post
Current flowing thru ferrous metals create a non-linear Z which translates into distortion... Ferrous metals within 2-3cm (1 inch) of a signal carrying wire is sufficient to measure the thd increase.

Thus, keep ferrous metals like the chassis might be - 1 inch or more away from the signal wires and pcb/circuitry. And, of course dont, therefore, use parts with ferrous metals in them.

The research done on this came from Japan... I think I recall who/company but not sure. -Dick Marsh

Great...thanks. I can tig weld stainless and if I can get paint to stck to it, powdercoat it and bake it in Mrs. Aeronautical's oven.

One parameter resolved.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 01:49 AM   #27226
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Richard is right. Of course, copper, silver, maybe Uranium might be OK. Can you afford it? I'll stick to aluminum.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 02:20 AM   #27227
fas42 is online now fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by morinix View Post
Care to grace us with some examples?
I've already mentioned driving boogie rock with strong cymbal content, rock with studio injected cavernous soundstages in another post. 80's new wave pop with layers and layers of synthesiser sounds and heavy reverb and other effects in the mix are hard work for a lot of systems.

In another direction, early 30's swing orchestras, with rows of brass blasting out crescendos well back in the soundstage

An Ambisonics recording by Nimbus of Franck and Faure chamber music, an extremely distant acoustic is conjured up.

The Essential Odette on Vanguard, live recording at Carnegie Hall, mastered at an extremely low level: full volume is just barely loud enough.

Ike & Tina Turner in concert, very, very dirty sound, plus full blown studio mixes on one CD. Massively energetic, raw sound, would be diabolical on most setups.

Jimi Hendrix Experience's Voodoo Chile recorded live, and done superbly. The drum kit is captured perfectly, and the Marshall amp growls and grinds menacingly. With excellent audience ambience. But will your system show it?

The list goes on and on ...

Frank

Last edited by fas42; 4th September 2012 at 02:23 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 02:24 AM   #27228
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bryant, Arkansas
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Richard is right. Of course, copper, silver, maybe Uranium might be OK. Can you afford it? I'll stick to aluminum.

I think I still have a connection for stainless sheet metal. If so I can build my chassis out of that.

Now for the trivial things...like electrical properties.

Come on guys...lighten up...i WAS JUST KIDDING

I am trying to come up with some design goals but heck, I just want it to sound good, last a long time, and be within my abilities to build. Mr. Curl, I am looking at the schematic you posted earlier today. I would need a little bit of guidance but am willing to have a go at it. In the next few days I will try to figure out if I can buy the parts. I wish there would be others out there that would build this along with me...it would be a shame for these guys to waste good energy on something productive like building the best preramp we can build.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 02:32 AM   #27229
fas42 is online now fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua_G View Post
... and it is very far from being musical.
That's the number 1 criterion for me, the worst of the worst recordings have to be musical, in that sense I'm totally on your side here. And this musn't be achieved by doing the equivalent of throwing a thick blanket over the speakers, I've heard this system "sound" many times, and it is not the correct way ...

Frank
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th September 2012, 02:34 AM   #27230
morinix is offline morinix  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by fas42 View Post
I've already mentioned driving boogie rock with strong cymbal content, rock with studio injected cavernous soundstages in another post. 80's new wave pop with layers and layers of synthesiser sounds and heavy reverb and other effects in the mix are hard work for a lot of systems.

In another direction, early 30's swing orchestras, with rows of brass blasting out crescendos well back in the soundstage

An Ambisonics recording by Nimbus of Franck and Faure chamber music, an extremely distant acoustic is conjured up.

The Essential Odette on Vanguard, live recording at Carnegie Hall, mastered at an extremely low level: full volume is just barely loud enough.

Ike & Tina Turner in concert, very, very dirty sound, plus full blown studio mixes on one CD. Massively energetic, raw sound, would be diabolical on most setups.

Jimi Hendrix Experience's Voodoo Chile recorded live, and done superbly. The drum kit is captured perfectly, and the Marshall amp growls and grinds menacingly. With excellent audience ambience. But will your system show it?

The list goes on and on ...

Frank
Ok, cool
__________________
Robert
Lounge Audio
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide 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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:49 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2