Lars Clausen said:
Some people like to look inside their amplifiers. For them, everything may have an effect on the sound, even if no difference can be seen in the signal coming out of it.
This is perfectly true, and I'm not taking the p*ss (much). I'm just not one of those people.
Cheers
IH
Sometimes doing something like Lars suggests will not be measurable but still have an effect on the sound.
This has been shown time and time again in amplifier design so why dismiss it?
Its not like he is here spruiking for one of his products.
Going back through much of the discussion in this forum it seems people are just willing to shadow NP's opinion instead of thinking and trying things for themselves.
This has been shown time and time again in amplifier design so why dismiss it?
Its not like he is here spruiking for one of his products.
Going back through much of the discussion in this forum it seems people are just willing to shadow NP's opinion instead of thinking and trying things for themselves.
It seems the argumentum goes round and round and not really exploring all the possible aspects that could influence the final result.
First of all if I understand correctly Lars redesigned the PS of his amp and got positive end result in sound. In such matter any designer I think will search in his mind the explanation what changed it for the better. So he had this theory that he knew and took it as an answer. Well ok, but we do not exactly know how many and exactly what changes he did. Did he just add 0.1 resistors going in and out of each cap? Which type of cap is the first one shown on the schematic (the one Lars posted) right after the rectifier. Was it there before also? So basically the question is weather he had an RC filtering in the first place or did he add the R part to the equation and that improved the sound.
The next thing in my opinion is that we have to also look at the rectifier bridge. If there are any resonance's forming in these caps, then most likely the bridge is the one giving these resonance's the energy to liven them up in the first place. Diodes with their switching behaviour are anyway known to be a bad thing
So maybe the resistors help in this regards not current sharing?
The third that I don't see mentioned here is a positive effect of inserting series resistors before the bridge. I mean between the transformer secondary and the bridge. This seems also to do a lot of good to sound and I have myself proven it (to myself) on many occasions. This effect is also something that is not so easy to verify with measurements, but it changes the sound.
And last point is that can it not be that the physical layout of the supply (and complete amp also) influences how much Lars's changes influence the sound. Some of us have longer supply wires/traces some shorter and so on. So the effect might not come out as strong in all cases.
Ergo
First of all if I understand correctly Lars redesigned the PS of his amp and got positive end result in sound. In such matter any designer I think will search in his mind the explanation what changed it for the better. So he had this theory that he knew and took it as an answer. Well ok, but we do not exactly know how many and exactly what changes he did. Did he just add 0.1 resistors going in and out of each cap? Which type of cap is the first one shown on the schematic (the one Lars posted) right after the rectifier. Was it there before also? So basically the question is weather he had an RC filtering in the first place or did he add the R part to the equation and that improved the sound.
The next thing in my opinion is that we have to also look at the rectifier bridge. If there are any resonance's forming in these caps, then most likely the bridge is the one giving these resonance's the energy to liven them up in the first place. Diodes with their switching behaviour are anyway known to be a bad thing
So maybe the resistors help in this regards not current sharing?The third that I don't see mentioned here is a positive effect of inserting series resistors before the bridge. I mean between the transformer secondary and the bridge. This seems also to do a lot of good to sound and I have myself proven it (to myself) on many occasions. This effect is also something that is not so easy to verify with measurements, but it changes the sound.
And last point is that can it not be that the physical layout of the supply (and complete amp also) influences how much Lars's changes influence the sound. Some of us have longer supply wires/traces some shorter and so on. So the effect might not come out as strong in all cases.
Ergo
Agisthos said:
That, sir, is a troll.
Cheers
IH
PS http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/t/troll.html]troll.
Agisthos said:
The problem I have with that is that the theoritical analysis can be repeated, and can be agreed to be right or wrong by reasonable objective means. For instance, theoretical analysis can easily show that the current whoppling story just is incorrect. That analysis is not open to subjective "believe".
On the other hand, if someone who has a vested interest in certain things tells it really works because he heard it himself, that's just one man's personal opinion, and with a vested interest.
I think I will keep my healthy scepticism.
Jan Didden
ergo said:
Sorry Ergo, you skipped the most important step: To make sure that indeed there WAS a positive end result in sound. Repeat the test, different people, two amps identical except for the PSU, statistical valid results, you know the story. Why should I (or you)run out and start a scientific investigation on hear-say from one man, who has a vested interest to boot? That's plain stupid!
If credibility on these results is established, THEN you go and try to find out why this happened.
Jan Didden
Janneman: Everyone is of course entitled to his or her healthy scepticism. However if you want to prove everything you can hear, theoretically, before you believe it, i think that your lack of measurement methods can become your limiting factor.
In this case you can check it out by doing it. It's pretty simple.
After that i would be very interested to hear your opinion.
Here in Denmark we have a saying: 'any criticism on others can always lead back to yourself'. Looking at your expression : "parrotting what some salesman told him", i find it pretty obvious that this saying hits right on. Just my point of view
It's true that the current whoppling EFFECT was brought to my attention by what you call a 'cap salesman'. However the IMPACT on sound quality and the SOLUTION to this was investigated / created by myself. I realise that anyone who makes an innovative solution to anything, and not just continues what he and everybody has been doing for 30 years, should expect some pounding from followers of the latter. And i don't mind.
Why keep the endless discussion going? Check it out instead!
In this case you can check it out by doing it. It's pretty simple.
After that i would be very interested to hear your opinion.
Here in Denmark we have a saying: 'any criticism on others can always lead back to yourself'. Looking at your expression : "parrotting what some salesman told him", i find it pretty obvious that this saying hits right on. Just my point of view
It's true that the current whoppling EFFECT was brought to my attention by what you call a 'cap salesman'. However the IMPACT on sound quality and the SOLUTION to this was investigated / created by myself. I realise that anyone who makes an innovative solution to anything, and not just continues what he and everybody has been doing for 30 years, should expect some pounding from followers of the latter. And i don't mind.
Why keep the endless discussion going? Check it out instead!
Agisthos said:
As I understand from the posts, Lars is selling products believed to benefit from this current whoppling thing. That is a vested interest, isn't it?
Now, before you all fall over me because I accuse Lars of being dishonest, I am most positively NOT. I don't know him, and as far as I know he may be the most honest person on the planet. But ever met a mother who objectively states that her baby really is quite ugly? And nobody would ask that of any mother. So, in my view Lars is not qualified to give any statement on the benefits if any of current whoppling.
Jan Didden
Lars Clausen said:
Lars, I have no axe to grind with you, see also my previous post. And I can understand your statement: check it out yourself. But that is also a very cheap statement. If you or anybody makes such claims as you do, it really is a bit too simple to say: check it out or shut up.
You know full well that one can spend 24hrs a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year checking out everything that is thrown at you like this, with supporting evidence that either is absent or flies in the face of everything known so far. I am willing to follow up interesting issues, but I expect the originator to put in some effort to get my attention.
If you believe in your thing, it is IN YOUR OWN INTEREST to do some research or whatever that goes further than: "I listened to it and can state that it sounds great".
In the whoppling case, I did a quick calculation, assuming 50mOhms series resistor for the cap and a 5000uF cap, this forms a lpf with about 55kHz cut-off freq. That means at 55kHz the charging current is 90degr ahead of the cap voltage. At 50Hz, it's roughly 0.1% of that. I stopped there, concluding: crap. The rest of the 24hrs I'll spend on something else. I know, life's a *****.
janneman
Janneman: i really don't understand why you are so eager to 'parrot what your friend Nelson told you' (Just to use your own term). Namely the expression 'Crap'.
If you think my proposal can benefit your projects in any way, use it, if you don't find it useful, let it be. Others can use it freely and benefit from this.
Unless of course you also have any obvious commercial interests (like Nelson) to dismiss my theory (without even checking it out, i think you could have comfortably tested the setup in half the time you already spent dicussing it here on diyaudio.com)
If you think my proposal can benefit your projects in any way, use it, if you don't find it useful, let it be. Others can use it freely and benefit from this.
Unless of course you also have any obvious commercial interests (like Nelson) to dismiss my theory (without even checking it out, i think you could have comfortably tested the setup in half the time you already spent dicussing it here on diyaudio.com)
Lars,
I think we are not getting anywhere from this point on. Nelson is not my friend, if I used his expression (I don't know I did, but I take your word for it) it must be because I agree with it.
I have NO commercial interest in audio at all (I wish I had) and I think I made it clear why I think the way I do. I don't think I can present my case in any other way to make it more clear.
You or anybody else may or may not agree. That's fine.
And again, I have no axe to grind with you personally. But there are so many people on this forum that blindly follow anything thrown at them, that my critical posts are hardly going to make a dent. But there's one thing I hate even more than bad sound. That's people refusing to think for themselves.
janneman
/"How many exercise their body, how few their minds", Seneca, greek philosopher, approx 400BC, on seeing the preparations for Athens classical olympics.
I think we are not getting anywhere from this point on. Nelson is not my friend, if I used his expression (I don't know I did, but I take your word for it) it must be because I agree with it.
I have NO commercial interest in audio at all (I wish I had) and I think I made it clear why I think the way I do. I don't think I can present my case in any other way to make it more clear.
You or anybody else may or may not agree. That's fine.
And again, I have no axe to grind with you personally. But there are so many people on this forum that blindly follow anything thrown at them, that my critical posts are hardly going to make a dent. But there's one thing I hate even more than bad sound. That's people refusing to think for themselves.
janneman
/"How many exercise their body, how few their minds", Seneca, greek philosopher, approx 400BC, on seeing the preparations for Athens classical olympics.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.