Im quite sure that the DIY people are not the same people as the potential clients of Pass Labs.
Very few people actually get something out of DIY thats even close to the Pass Labs products, quality and designvise, and those who does have spent so many hours and so much money that its no competition anyway.
Magura
Very few people actually get something out of DIY thats even close to the Pass Labs products, quality and designvise, and those who does have spent so many hours and so much money that its no competition anyway.
Magura
Your attacks on Grey are pathetic and self serving
Total B.S. Starting a thread to reverse engineer someone's commercial design is not doing the original designer any favors. Doing it twice and without the knowledge to even to reverse engineer it, and even posting circuits that don't work well or even at all is no favor to the forum. One would question the motivation for such actions other than the notoriety from riding on Mr. Pass's coattails and having little to contribute from actual work done. I don't think posting circuits that you haven't even built and gotten some feel for reliability and stability is a very could idea, unless you don't know how they work and are fishing for help. A low power X type Aleph is a commercially viable product one that it appears Mr. Pass is worth marketing. What the thread on this has done is to give commercial knock offs a real big head start. Mr. Pass is probably to much of a gentleman to point this out...... I am not. I find it very odd that few designs based loosely on Nelson topologies are posted but great interest is shown for reverse engineering designs to be based very much on the results of years of his hard work. It is too easy to underestimate the time involved in a design by just copying the work that has already been done. As for self serving......... ask yourself who is really being served by this. It sure isn't Nelson in my view.
Total B.S. Starting a thread to reverse engineer someone's commercial design is not doing the original designer any favors. Doing it twice and without the knowledge to even to reverse engineer it, and even posting circuits that don't work well or even at all is no favor to the forum. One would question the motivation for such actions other than the notoriety from riding on Mr. Pass's coattails and having little to contribute from actual work done. I don't think posting circuits that you haven't even built and gotten some feel for reliability and stability is a very could idea, unless you don't know how they work and are fishing for help. A low power X type Aleph is a commercially viable product one that it appears Mr. Pass is worth marketing. What the thread on this has done is to give commercial knock offs a real big head start. Mr. Pass is probably to much of a gentleman to point this out...... I am not. I find it very odd that few designs based loosely on Nelson topologies are posted but great interest is shown for reverse engineering designs to be based very much on the results of years of his hard work. It is too easy to underestimate the time involved in a design by just copying the work that has already been done. As for self serving......... ask yourself who is really being served by this. It sure isn't Nelson in my view.
"At the same time, I have always assumed that one of the
motivations of the typical DIYer is the joy of discovering things
for one's self, and toward that end, I think it's more fun to
scatter bread crumbs along the path than to install a trolley line.".
Absolutely, its the journey and the discoveries along the way that make it such a joy.
Not to mention the thoughtful email responses to so many by Nelson Pass that make learning such an exciting experience.
There is far more to be gained by following and constructing the Passdiy tutorials than jumping into the cloning of the commercial designs.
At the moment I am bread boarding the Passdiy opamps and following the article step by step, its so clear and concise.
I've even got a few parts from K... to play around with...what more could one ask for.
Ian
motivations of the typical DIYer is the joy of discovering things
for one's self, and toward that end, I think it's more fun to
scatter bread crumbs along the path than to install a trolley line.".
Absolutely, its the journey and the discoveries along the way that make it such a joy.
Not to mention the thoughtful email responses to so many by Nelson Pass that make learning such an exciting experience.
There is far more to be gained by following and constructing the Passdiy tutorials than jumping into the cloning of the commercial designs.
At the moment I am bread boarding the Passdiy opamps and following the article step by step, its so clear and concise.
I've even got a few parts from K... to play around with...what more could one ask for.
Ian
Re: Your attacks on Grey are pathetic and self serving
Again, I appreciate your viewpoint and sentiments, Fred, and
I value your opinion. That said, my actual experience is that
I suffered more rip-offs in my own market before I gained the
public exposure to the DIY crowd. In a way, perhaps freedom of
information has created its own security. (Sounds like internet
BS, doesn't it?)
I don't really know, but I've already made enough money, and
life is way short, so I do what I want while I still can.
Fred Dieckmann said:
Again, I appreciate your viewpoint and sentiments, Fred, and
I value your opinion. That said, my actual experience is that
I suffered more rip-offs in my own market before I gained the
public exposure to the DIY crowd. In a way, perhaps freedom of
information has created its own security. (Sounds like internet
BS, doesn't it?)
I don't really know, but I've already made enough money, and
life is way short, so I do what I want while I still can.
Just like to say that if it wasn't for N.Pass and Zen article I'd never build an amplifier myself...
I've never heard an amplifier with such worm and intimate sound, and the greatest thing is that I actualy build it myself completely understanding the circuit, and even been able to play with it.
Since then I could even understand more compex circuits, and was very happy reading the AlephX thread actualy understanding what you guys were talking about.
Would that qualify as a value of simple circuits?!?
Thanks Nelson!
boris
I've never heard an amplifier with such worm and intimate sound, and the greatest thing is that I actualy build it myself completely understanding the circuit, and even been able to play with it.
Since then I could even understand more compex circuits, and was very happy reading the AlephX thread actualy understanding what you guys were talking about.
Would that qualify as a value of simple circuits?!?
Thanks Nelson!
boris
It's nice to see that there is some blood flowing in this website again. Can you respect someone while at the same time have a disagreement? I believe you can.
It is also nice to see that Nelson has still not changed his philosophy about sharing his designs.
NOT so nice to see that there is still alot of resentment from the "engineering dept." that it was Nelson and not them to come up with the su-sy idea.
It is also nice to see that Nelson has still not changed his philosophy about sharing his designs.
NOT so nice to see that there is still alot of resentment from the "engineering dept." that it was Nelson and not them to come up with the su-sy idea.
My, my, my...
I've long been a believer in the idea that things run in cycles, be it economics, fashions in clothing, or trends in socio-political thinking. As such, it's hardly surprising that the tide here at DIY should turn. But that it should turn so quickly did catch me a bit off guard.
A quickie history of my version of the Aleph-X, for those who can't find it in the Aleph-X thread (it ain't easy, I know). The general concept first occurred to me back several years ago when Petter's X-100 thread was current. Why that thread never achieved the momentum that the Aleph-X thread did is beyond me. It looked to me as though Petter was making good progress. In any event, I was sitting there looking at Petter's proposed circuit and Nelson's patents and the idea sprang into mind that the "X" concept and the Aleph concept were not mutually exclusive. I had at least two variations in mind at the time (hint, hint...) and mentioned such in a post. As I recall, the proposal was not received kindly. Such is life. Clearly, the cycle turned later. And will turn yet again in the future, mark my words. The day will come when people say,"Aleph-X? What's that?" And the thread will be lost in obscurity.
******
Incidentally, I had, in that same thread, made a stand for Nelson's intellectual property rights, and subsequently e-mailed him directly about it. His reply was pretty much the same then that it is now. I personally interpret his words as meaning that he views DIY efforts as publicity for his commercial product. Two other possibilities are: 1) That he is curious to see if someone can find a variation that he missed. 2) That he might, just possibly, believe in the concept of "pay-forward." Caveat: His actual feelings on the matter may or may not match my understanding.
******
The circuit that I later labelled the Aleph-X lay low for a while, but I finally sat down and worked out one of the variations in my mind one slow evening at work. A few weeks later I drew up a formal schematic and sent it off to Nelson. He usually responds in a day or two, but this time a reply burned back across the wires in an hour or two.
The content? Not to release the circuit yet, because it was in some ways similar to one he was about to offer at the winter CES. After that, go ahead. And, as I said in the Aleph-X thread, he noted that I might have trouble with absolute DC offset (he later suggested using 30 ohm grounding resistors--I hadn't dared to go below 1k and had dropped the idea). At that point, I viewed the circuit as purely conceptual; I had not built a prototype. No one could have been any more astounded than I was that the concept circuit was in any way similar to viable commercial product.
A few weeks later, Nelson--not me--mentioned here that I had such a circuit and things began to build momentum. I still had yet to build a prototype. But with DIY members "clamoring" for a circuit, I started fiddling. Then, as now, time was in short supply, and I had to limit my fiddlings to an hour or two in the wee hours of the morning before going to bed.
I finally started the thread, after checking with Nelson as to whether the timing suited him. Fred, as usual, said the circuit wouldn't work. (The day he doesn't say that is the day one of my circuits will actually fail--kinda like telling an actor to "break a leg" as they head for the stage. Thanks Fred. Incidentally, he was calling himself Harry Haller then for those of you who've lost track of his personae.)
As to my crossover thread--either of them, for that matter--my intent, as I thought I made clear, wasn't to reverse-engineer Nelson's commercial product, though I do, as a practical matter, like the idea of using jumpers to set the frequencies, Q, and such. It's nothing but a Sallen-Key filter. No patents involved. Why Fred's got his panties in such a knot over that one, I can't imagine, especially as he was so intent on reverse-engineering Nelson's use of resistances. Sometimes Fred puzzles me. Clearly it's an emotional issue with him, not a logical one.
The name Xenover was suggested by the intentional simplicity of the circuit. And, no, it's not an "X" circuit per se. I doubt that anyone is going to be fooled by the difference between "Zen" and "Xeno," but just in case, I'll issue a disclaimer: It ain't Nelson's circuit. It ain't intended to be Nelson's circuit. So there.
As to the level of complexity--or lack or it--of Nelson's recent published projects, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that there are DIY folks out there who aren't members of this site. They're out in rural West Virginia, downtown Seattle, and possibly right next door to you. They think they're all alone. Every new project Nelson publishes is another step in their education. Things that members here take for granted, such as X feedback, are new and foreign to them, and they need help taking that step. Have mercy on them.
Besides, methinks I see a pattern to Nelson's papers, whether it's conscious or not. I'm content to let things run their course.
Grey
P.S.: I feel a bit uneasy about the idea that the First Watt commercial Aleph-X carries the same name as my project version. I specifically chose the name Aleph-X so as to distance my circuit from Nelson's XA nomenclature. Then along came the First Watt product with the same name. Perhaps it's one of those cyclical things.
I've long been a believer in the idea that things run in cycles, be it economics, fashions in clothing, or trends in socio-political thinking. As such, it's hardly surprising that the tide here at DIY should turn. But that it should turn so quickly did catch me a bit off guard.
A quickie history of my version of the Aleph-X, for those who can't find it in the Aleph-X thread (it ain't easy, I know). The general concept first occurred to me back several years ago when Petter's X-100 thread was current. Why that thread never achieved the momentum that the Aleph-X thread did is beyond me. It looked to me as though Petter was making good progress. In any event, I was sitting there looking at Petter's proposed circuit and Nelson's patents and the idea sprang into mind that the "X" concept and the Aleph concept were not mutually exclusive. I had at least two variations in mind at the time (hint, hint...) and mentioned such in a post. As I recall, the proposal was not received kindly. Such is life. Clearly, the cycle turned later. And will turn yet again in the future, mark my words. The day will come when people say,"Aleph-X? What's that?" And the thread will be lost in obscurity.
******
Incidentally, I had, in that same thread, made a stand for Nelson's intellectual property rights, and subsequently e-mailed him directly about it. His reply was pretty much the same then that it is now. I personally interpret his words as meaning that he views DIY efforts as publicity for his commercial product. Two other possibilities are: 1) That he is curious to see if someone can find a variation that he missed. 2) That he might, just possibly, believe in the concept of "pay-forward." Caveat: His actual feelings on the matter may or may not match my understanding.
******
The circuit that I later labelled the Aleph-X lay low for a while, but I finally sat down and worked out one of the variations in my mind one slow evening at work. A few weeks later I drew up a formal schematic and sent it off to Nelson. He usually responds in a day or two, but this time a reply burned back across the wires in an hour or two.
The content? Not to release the circuit yet, because it was in some ways similar to one he was about to offer at the winter CES. After that, go ahead. And, as I said in the Aleph-X thread, he noted that I might have trouble with absolute DC offset (he later suggested using 30 ohm grounding resistors--I hadn't dared to go below 1k and had dropped the idea). At that point, I viewed the circuit as purely conceptual; I had not built a prototype. No one could have been any more astounded than I was that the concept circuit was in any way similar to viable commercial product.
A few weeks later, Nelson--not me--mentioned here that I had such a circuit and things began to build momentum. I still had yet to build a prototype. But with DIY members "clamoring" for a circuit, I started fiddling. Then, as now, time was in short supply, and I had to limit my fiddlings to an hour or two in the wee hours of the morning before going to bed.
I finally started the thread, after checking with Nelson as to whether the timing suited him. Fred, as usual, said the circuit wouldn't work. (The day he doesn't say that is the day one of my circuits will actually fail--kinda like telling an actor to "break a leg" as they head for the stage. Thanks Fred. Incidentally, he was calling himself Harry Haller then for those of you who've lost track of his personae.)
As to my crossover thread--either of them, for that matter--my intent, as I thought I made clear, wasn't to reverse-engineer Nelson's commercial product, though I do, as a practical matter, like the idea of using jumpers to set the frequencies, Q, and such. It's nothing but a Sallen-Key filter. No patents involved. Why Fred's got his panties in such a knot over that one, I can't imagine, especially as he was so intent on reverse-engineering Nelson's use of resistances. Sometimes Fred puzzles me. Clearly it's an emotional issue with him, not a logical one.
The name Xenover was suggested by the intentional simplicity of the circuit. And, no, it's not an "X" circuit per se. I doubt that anyone is going to be fooled by the difference between "Zen" and "Xeno," but just in case, I'll issue a disclaimer: It ain't Nelson's circuit. It ain't intended to be Nelson's circuit. So there.
As to the level of complexity--or lack or it--of Nelson's recent published projects, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that there are DIY folks out there who aren't members of this site. They're out in rural West Virginia, downtown Seattle, and possibly right next door to you. They think they're all alone. Every new project Nelson publishes is another step in their education. Things that members here take for granted, such as X feedback, are new and foreign to them, and they need help taking that step. Have mercy on them.
Besides, methinks I see a pattern to Nelson's papers, whether it's conscious or not. I'm content to let things run their course.
Grey
P.S.: I feel a bit uneasy about the idea that the First Watt commercial Aleph-X carries the same name as my project version. I specifically chose the name Aleph-X so as to distance my circuit from Nelson's XA nomenclature. Then along came the First Watt product with the same name. Perhaps it's one of those cyclical things.
Re: Re: Your attacks on Grey are pathetic and self serving
May I engrave thay on my Aleph, when its finished?
But seriously, this freedom of information is very much appreciated. Thank you very much, Mr Pass.
Now If there would also be launched a First (mili)Watt pre, it might just fit in my budget too buy of the shelf to complement the Aleph..
Nelson Pass said:
life is way short, so I do what I want while I still can.
May I engrave thay on my Aleph, when its finished?
But seriously, this freedom of information is very much appreciated. Thank you very much, Mr Pass.
Now If there would also be launched a First (mili)Watt pre, it might just fit in my budget too buy of the shelf to complement the Aleph..
GRollins said:
I realize that you wouldn't have any way of knowing it, but the
Aleph X name has been kicking around internally for maybe 6
years. Like you, I used it to distance First Watt from the XA
series, not thinking about your project. I certainly don't have a
problem, as the two amplifiers are bound to be similar anyway,
and if some DIYer accidentally buys a FW amp thinking he's
getting a kit, I'll give him a refund.
refund: not in accord with Ferengi Rules of Acquisition
Some honest questions
"I was sitting there looking at Petter's proposed circuit and Nelson's patents and the idea sprang into mind that the "X" concept and the Aleph concept were not mutually exclusive."
Let me see if I understand this..... you came up with the Aleph X topology independently of Nelson's help by combining the X amps and Aleph design. Are you pulling our leg or are you really that experienced an amplifier builder? If the second is the case I doff my hat to you because I never knew you were at that level.
The active crossover........
It seems to me that I remember you were the one who desired a kinship with the Pass labs crossover by calling your creation the Xenover. reverse engineering the resistor matrix and Qs of the filters slopes was just a fun challenge and moamps is the one that came up with the closest likely values. He is a sharp guy! Somewhere along the way I came up with a different resistor matrix that was more along the lines of what I wanted for parts count, form factor of the pin grid, and number of adjustments. That was quite a bit of effort and a very satisfying endeavor. The result of which I shared with who ever would like to use it. It seems to come to mind that moamps and I working independently came up with a discrete transistor op amp along the lines of what Pass recommended in his op amp article.
"Clearly it's an emotional issue with him, not a logical one." Actually it's both. Good circuit design takes a lot of logic and is way beyond just fiddling around with some parts on the bench. I am passionate about audio design, and as a friend put it does not suffer fools gladly.
I would love to support you on your stuff more often, but you get so much wrong that it gets frustrating trying to unconfuse the victims of your advice. I tried to be nice replying to one of your other post and follow the advice from someone we both get along with, to just ignore you. Then you come along and dump this load of intrigue on my head....
Your remark "It's nothing but a Sallen-Key filter," is an insult to people that have put a lot of effort into the topic on the forum. If it is as no sweat as that, I would expect that we would have seen the design you promised.
"The name Xenover was suggested by the intentional simplicity of the circuit. And, no, it's not an "X" circuit per se. I doubt that anyone is going to be fooled by the difference between "Zen" and "Xeno," but just in case, I'll issue a disclaimer: It ain't Nelson's circuit. It ain't intended to be Nelson's circuit. So there."
I appreciate that clarification but chuckle over the irony, since this stuff was posted in the Pass Labs thread and even better, in the DIY progress report thread! You have a fine eye for satire. Is Xenover still the name of your project? I actually liked the suggestion someone gave you of "Rollover". I just call it the Wenever.......... that was a bit of harmless humor so no diatribe is called for.
Good Night,
Fred
"I was sitting there looking at Petter's proposed circuit and Nelson's patents and the idea sprang into mind that the "X" concept and the Aleph concept were not mutually exclusive."
Let me see if I understand this..... you came up with the Aleph X topology independently of Nelson's help by combining the X amps and Aleph design. Are you pulling our leg or are you really that experienced an amplifier builder? If the second is the case I doff my hat to you because I never knew you were at that level.
The active crossover........
It seems to me that I remember you were the one who desired a kinship with the Pass labs crossover by calling your creation the Xenover. reverse engineering the resistor matrix and Qs of the filters slopes was just a fun challenge and moamps is the one that came up with the closest likely values. He is a sharp guy! Somewhere along the way I came up with a different resistor matrix that was more along the lines of what I wanted for parts count, form factor of the pin grid, and number of adjustments. That was quite a bit of effort and a very satisfying endeavor. The result of which I shared with who ever would like to use it. It seems to come to mind that moamps and I working independently came up with a discrete transistor op amp along the lines of what Pass recommended in his op amp article.
"Clearly it's an emotional issue with him, not a logical one." Actually it's both. Good circuit design takes a lot of logic and is way beyond just fiddling around with some parts on the bench. I am passionate about audio design, and as a friend put it does not suffer fools gladly.
I would love to support you on your stuff more often, but you get so much wrong that it gets frustrating trying to unconfuse the victims of your advice. I tried to be nice replying to one of your other post and follow the advice from someone we both get along with, to just ignore you. Then you come along and dump this load of intrigue on my head....
Your remark "It's nothing but a Sallen-Key filter," is an insult to people that have put a lot of effort into the topic on the forum. If it is as no sweat as that, I would expect that we would have seen the design you promised.
"The name Xenover was suggested by the intentional simplicity of the circuit. And, no, it's not an "X" circuit per se. I doubt that anyone is going to be fooled by the difference between "Zen" and "Xeno," but just in case, I'll issue a disclaimer: It ain't Nelson's circuit. It ain't intended to be Nelson's circuit. So there."
I appreciate that clarification but chuckle over the irony, since this stuff was posted in the Pass Labs thread and even better, in the DIY progress report thread! You have a fine eye for satire. Is Xenover still the name of your project? I actually liked the suggestion someone gave you of "Rollover". I just call it the Wenever.......... that was a bit of harmless humor so no diatribe is called for.
Good Night,
Fred