John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 91 - 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 3rd September 2009, 06:23 PM   #901
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
I would like to see the math for the non-harmonically related frequencies or how three orders of magnitude more PM in a speaker than an average amplifier does not matter.
Unfortunately Scott you can't see the math of perception. But according to many researches (I'm not name-dropping) we perceive and compare by similarity. If distortions mimic what we expect to hear in the nature we ignore (filter out) them; we do that all the time recognizing sounds passed through the air, through walls, reflected by different non-linear surfaces and so on, and the more they differ the more of processing is needed to reconstruct and recognize sounds. It leads to a listening fatigue that can't be measured precisely, but can be used as an indicator.

Vintage speaker are more venerable, they cost more than modern ones. Why? Because on the run for lower THD numbers designers made speakers that produce more alien to the nature distortions, but anyway they are mostly mechanical devices, so their higher THD and PM levels add less of unnatural errors than amps do.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:36 PM   #902
diyAudio Member
 
jan.didden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Great City of Turnhout, Belgium
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
They convinced me, already. But then I am more willing to learn new things, and accept that some people actually know more than me about it. I do have a call into Mitch Cotter. He is tied up on his project, but I did leave a message asking for further details, just 1/2 hour ago. It may be until tomorrow, before I hear from him. I have tried over the last 18 hours, already.
Personally, I don't need to convince anyone here about anything. It is your gain or loss to follow up. It is now obvious to me, but it is because I participated in presenting the original graph, and did dozens of separate measurements, myself, in Matti's lab, getting the same graphs. I KNOW the test procedure, and its correctness.
What Mitch Cotter contributed, was NOTING the FM distortion as it would appear on the same graph. He showed Matti, Matti verified it, himself, (didn't tell me), thanked Mitch, then wrote his first paper on PIM, ALL math, no measurements. I just met up with Mitch a few months ago, and we talk almost every day. Does this help?
Not really. I'm stil being asked to believe your and Mitch's blue eyes. If you understand it so well, and are so strongly convinced that it is correct, why not explain what's going on?

jd
__________________
I won't make the tactical error to try to dislodge with rational arguments a conviction that is beyond reason - Daniel Dennett
Check out Linear Audio Vol 7!
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:39 PM   #903
diyAudio Member
 
Juergen Knoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Dear Anatoly,
you tend to babble.
Please explain precisely, are you spicing up the soup (=add distortions and other artefacts for better sound) or not?
Regards
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:40 PM   #904
diyAudio Member
 
jan.didden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Great City of Turnhout, Belgium
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
Unfortunately Scott you can't see the math of perception. But according to many researches (I'm not name-dropping) we perceive and compare by similarity. If distortions mimic what we expect to hear in the nature we ignore (filter out) them; we do that all the time recognizing sounds passed through the air, through walls, reflected by different non-linear surfaces and so on, and the more they differ the more of processing is needed to reconstruct and recognize sounds. It leads to a listening fatigue that can't be measured precisely, but can be used as an indicator.

Vintage speaker are more venerable, they cost more than modern ones. Why? Because on the run for lower THD numbers designers made speakers that produce more alien to the nature distortions, but anyway they are mostly mechanical devices, so their higher THD and PM levels add less of unnatural errors than amps do.
Scott didn't ask for any math on perception. He said: "I would like to see the math for the non-harmonically related frequencies or ...". He asked for the math explaining how non-harmonically related freq lines can show up in the spectrum. Or so I understood.

jd
__________________
I won't make the tactical error to try to dislodge with rational arguments a conviction that is beyond reason - Daniel Dennett
Check out Linear Audio Vol 7!

Last edited by jan.didden; 3rd September 2009 at 06:43 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:44 PM   #905
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juergen Knoop View Post
Dear Anatoly,
you tend to babble.
Please explain precisely, are you spicing up the soup (=add distortions and other artefacts for better sound) or not?
No, I don't. I choose methods that add less of nastiest errors.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:48 PM   #906
diyAudio Member
 
Juergen Knoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
thank you!
regards
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:49 PM   #907
diyAudio Member
 
scott wurcer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cambridge ma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Cordell View Post
John,

You asserted that Barrie Gilbert's paper proved your point on PIM. That is not so, even though Barrie did not make any mistakes. I frankly think that you are very much in the habit of putting your own spin on what others say.

Cheers,
Bob
I just re-read, in part, Barrie's paper. The distortions are all related to the input frequency(s), the math BTW is not very complex. He shows a Taylor expansion of the first and third order on an input stage generates thirds, nothing remarkable.
__________________
Silence is so accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 06:58 PM   #908
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Stage 2, Scott?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 07:01 PM   #909
diyAudio Member
 
jan.didden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Great City of Turnhout, Belgium
Blog Entries: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
I just re-read, in part, Barrie's paper. The distortions are all related to the input frequency(s), the math BTW is not very complex. He shows a Taylor expansion of the first and third order on an input stage generates thirds, nothing remarkable.
So, that means John is plain wrong. Can we now move on please?

jd
__________________
I won't make the tactical error to try to dislodge with rational arguments a conviction that is beyond reason - Daniel Dennett
Check out Linear Audio Vol 7!
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2009, 07:18 PM   #910
diyAudio Member
 
Juergen Knoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post
No, I don't. I choose methods that add less of nastiest errors.
so the absence of measurable inband products is good enough?
Regards
  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 07:28 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