John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 3850 - 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 23rd April 2013, 10:13 PM   #38491
diyAudio Member
 
Steve Eddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sacramento, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
I am really confused. I looked at the website and found the standard nonsense. What does Bybee or JC have to do with it?
Because Bybee and John are both "...enthusiastic about what this device DOES for sound quality..."

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analo...ml#post3465548

se
__________________
The Audio Guild
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 10:32 PM   #38492
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
I have never heard the device being criticized at this time. I have no opinion of it, at this time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:00 PM   #38493
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Why is it that, as soon as halfway civilized discussion begins, someone comes and de-rails it by using "under the belt" tactics?
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:02 PM   #38494
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post
Because Bybee and John are both "...enthusiastic about what this device DOES for sound quality..."

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analo...ml#post3465548

se
It was John's associate not himself, but I think Mr. B finally stepped in it and John will just not have to smell it.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:03 PM   #38495
fas42 is online now fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
When you have what you think is close to the 'very best' in audio, the next step is 'tweaks and mods'.
And that's because standard components, no matter how expensive or well engineered in themselves, will get the job done - unless you're very lucky! Just look at the situation with digital, it still has a very hard time convincing many audio people, like John, that it can perform. Just connecting a set of bits, each fully verified as being capable using standard measurements, usually guarantees very ordinary, non-involving sound; many objectivists will then point to the poor quality of the recordings, the need for optimising speaker capability, room acoustic treatments or multichannel sound enhancement as the solutions.

However, a number of people have achieved exceptional sound using other techniques, and some realise that "extreme" care with optimising the electronics is an excellent approach. This is a classic "everything matters" area, which means that silly, expensive stuff will have an effect, just as much as the correct, engineering solution. Obviously the latter is somewhat preferable, , but the people with the right expertise, abilities and equipment need to take the necessity for further investigation seriously - this is the route for improvements in understanding ...
__________________
Frank . . . the truth is, I just like a bit of ASMR ...
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:06 PM   #38496
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Still, nobody seems to want to talk about the circuit topologies in both the Blowtorch and the Parasound products. Should I simplify it still further?
It's simple enough for me. Don't know about the others, though.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:23 PM   #38497
1audio is offline 1audio  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SF Bay Area
Blog Entries: 3
Here is a question about the "JC2" architecture-
The two sides operate independently, except for the feedback signals. Would there be a benefit from internal "cross-coupling" if there is a way to implement it?
__________________
Demian Martin
Product Design Services
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:29 PM   #38498
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Here is the 'minimum' version for discussion at the moment:
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 4Q-min.jpg (205.6 KB, 160 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:31 PM   #38499
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Midwestern US
Demian,

Perhaps something along the lines of Nelson Pass's "super-symmetry" topology (https://www.passdiy.com/project/arti...mplification)?
__________________
Mullard EL34
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd April 2013, 11:50 PM   #38500
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
Here is the 'minimum' version for discussion at the moment:
Now, by adding 4 parts, how do you drop the input capacitance by one or two orders of magnitude?
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  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 01:59 AM.


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