3 terminal Jung Super Regulator Kit

[ALW]

I usually make boards Jim Williams of Linear Technolgy style before making a final layout.

ROFL - Yep, I've got circuits like that too

Andy.

[fmak]

[QUOTE.


When you go to a live performance, particularly non-classical, the sound quality, in hi-fi terms is rarely great, but it often makes you dance, tap your feet, sing, cry etc...

There are assessment methods that home in on the primary aspects of music, and they work and provide long-term musical satisfaction if you're prepared to let them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

There is no basis in acoustics for what you said. Sounds like Ivor of Linn. Linn and Naim who subscribe to this had organised some of the worst demos I had ever attended. To me they were no fi s but noisy onslaughts.

[ALW]

There is no basis in acoustics for what you said.

I don't understand that statement - could you explain?

Andy.

[fmak]

Originally posted by ALW


I don't understand that statement - could you explain?

Andy.

-----------------------------------------------
First, the assumption is that foot tapping to a certain type of music makes a good system - perpetuated by some in UK. Many, like me, listen to Classical more often and show their responses in different ways. One can have identical responses to music being played thru a 1930s record player and my parents-in-law do. Doesn't mean that is hi-fi. There is no connection between the statements you made and physical electro-acoustics that I know, although some may claim otherwise.

Doesn't mean that you it is not real to you; it's just not generalisable as inferred.

[PMiczek]

Andy,

The version of Walt Jung circuit which started this thread came by way of your web page (?)

I think you wrote there in part,

"The above circuit offers excellent performance in all of the major areas relevant to a regulators operating parameters, it has very low output impedance, very low noise both static and under load, and good line rejection. All of these parameters are maintained over a far wider bandwidth than any readily-available monolithic IC regulator."

What does "very low" noise, and "good" line rejection mean, relative to the specifications of a modern 3-pin, or 5-pin (there, I said a bad word, I know) regulator? Not to mention "far wider". Not trying to be confrontational here, but if I am going to throw out those 3-pin regulators I just dusted of in favor of an op-amp circuit with many more parts, or even buy a kit to replace them in existing power supplies...

Didn't someone suggest earlier that all the world needs now is more sweet capacitance, and now we find out what it really needs is a good error amplifier!?

[fdegrove]

Hi,

First, the assumption is that foot tapping to a certain type of music makes a good system

Unfortunately I neither like either Linn nor Naim stuff...

What I do agree on is that no system that isn't inviting to either "play conductor" (on classical music). or "tapping the foot to the rythm of a tune" is doing the music any good...no matter how revealing of inner detail etc., etc....

After all we're there to listen to the music and enjoy it, not to analyse it to shreds.

Cheers,

[ThorstenL]

Koinichiwa,

Originally posted by ALW


My suggestion to those that found the Jung-reg's not beneficial (in analogue circuits) were not using ideal implementations, or had other masking effects, if they found 3-terminal alternatives better.

Note - I NEVER use 3-pin Jobs for analogue. I prefer film capacitors and chokes. But then, by choice, all my analogue circuits use good sounding Valves.

But more to the point, it seems my main point was misunderstood. Other than remarking upon the inability of the Jung/Sulzer (and mny others) regulator, I do not claim they are "bad".

On the contrary, in absolute measurable terms (wich exclude of course transient tests with current "pushed" back into the rail) the Jung/Sulzer reg is a major achievement of engineering at the margins of the achievable.

However, to conclude the measured superiority translates reliably into subjectively percieved superiority is arrogant. Further, considering the usual limitations posed by the use and implementation of "normal" 3-pin 78XX/79XX/317/337 et alstyle reg chips, replacing them with a 3-Pin Jung/Sulzer reg is unlikely to give much of an improvement.

Now IF the Jung/Sulzer reg where implemented with remote sensing and suitable ground layout there may be more of a point. But to make a 3-pin (78XX/79XX compatible PCB for the Jung/Sulzer reg is to throw away most of the technical benefits (or not) of that design.

So, I do not question that the Jung/Sulzer Circuit is a "good thing" (in the way Winnie the lovable Pooh sees a "good thing").

My question is:

"leaving out hype and concentrating on real applications, will the 3-Pin Jung/Sulzer circuit deliver a reliable improvemnt in subjectivly percieved sonics, comensureate with it's cost, especially when compared to other approaches?"

If the answer is not an absolute resounding "Yes", one may consider less expenive and complex alternatives that may be as goo or even better.

Sayonara

[fdegrove]

Hi,

If the answer is not an absolute resounding "Yes", one may consider less expenive and complex alternatives that may be as goo or even better.

It can't be a resounding "Yes"...there no such thing as the universally best regulator...

Sometimes, actually alot of times, I do get the feeling that engineers are just like politicians...neither have a feel for reality.

Cheers,

[PMiczek]

Sometimes, actually alot of times, I do get the feeling that engineers are just like politicians...neither have a feel for reality.

And when did you first start noticing this about engineers? (LOL)

... I was only asking for a couple (real) numbers, or maybe hoping for a link to a simple graph.

Entertaining Fred and Andy in the process was a completely un-intentional side effect, if not unexpected.

(maybe if I sort these regulators by size and color...)

[fdegrove]

Hi,

And when did you first start noticing this about engineers? (LOL)

Twenty years ago already...

Put it like this, most will swamp you with numbers but when it comes to designing for music reproduction they're just as clueless as you and me.