Hello
Carlos wrote in the Dx amp thread; "....the sound stage makes the bigger difference, and modifications to increase, or to control sound stage..." (Post #1927)
I find that to be a very interesting subject.
First, here's a partial definition of soundstage;
"The soundstage describes the extent to which a stereo system reproduces the location of instruments and vocalists as they were positioned during recording and mixing.
Good imaging creates a listening experience that seems natural and lifelike. The key to attaining the best possible imaging is equal and unobstructed path lengths between your tweeters and your ears. That's one of the reasons why matched component speakers, with their versatile tweeter placement, sound as good as they do."
The better the soundstage, the greater the sense of its definite width, depth and height.
So, for a better soundstage, a power amp sould have fast transient response, low phase distortions, low transient distortions... and maby others things that I forgot ?
Thank
Gaetan
Carlos wrote in the Dx amp thread; "....the sound stage makes the bigger difference, and modifications to increase, or to control sound stage..." (Post #1927)
I find that to be a very interesting subject.
First, here's a partial definition of soundstage;
"The soundstage describes the extent to which a stereo system reproduces the location of instruments and vocalists as they were positioned during recording and mixing.
Good imaging creates a listening experience that seems natural and lifelike. The key to attaining the best possible imaging is equal and unobstructed path lengths between your tweeters and your ears. That's one of the reasons why matched component speakers, with their versatile tweeter placement, sound as good as they do."
The better the soundstage, the greater the sense of its definite width, depth and height.
So, for a better soundstage, a power amp sould have fast transient response, low phase distortions, low transient distortions... and maby others things that I forgot ?
Thank
Gaetan
Better separation into stereo channels helps a lot
Two separated supplies....two separated rectifier, two separated bank of capacitors helps a lot.
Two mono amplifiers, entirelly separated gives you more separation.
When left and rigth have the same volume...sounds seems that comes from the center point between the speakers....the differences in volume and in tonality creates to you the ambience... something that allow you to evaluate spatial position.... how loud some instrument is may create the deepness.
Sound stage, in my point of view is a brain creation...or a brain re-creation base in the microphones positioning during the recording.
The same way we have stereoscopic vision...the angle between your eyes to a certain "target" will be informed to the brain...that data is what reference your "thinking department"...called conscience, to analise the distance that target has related your eyes.... without two eyes we cannot evaluate distance correctly...or...at least will need the "long learning process" to adapt a single eye information to the new reality..as only one angle will be the input to brain.
The same way eyes plus brain evaluate distance..... our ears can detect position and distances too.
Phase of some instrument may he helpfull to brain too...this will be another information about distance...timing information.....well...i read that but i personally do not believe we can have all that precision...at least.... this not detected by conscience.
To better audition...use a dark room... reduce all external inputs...nothing to your vision...nothing to your stomach...cannot need to go to WC...cannot be hungry...must sit confortable and must be calm to evaluate sonics when comparing...reduce all other inputs to your brain.... keep only your ears working and focused.
Speaker must be at your ears level.... absorbing material must be around to absorb reflections to help you evaluate.
The position...left to rigth, depend on the separation of channels...and deepness of field depends that you have no "blend" into your amplifier...the biggest possible "impedance" from left to rigth channel....mixing them...blending..interconnecting or something alike will cancel a lot of signals that are inverted one each other related phase.... sound will be blurred, will loose details..as a result bad separation, bad horizontal positioning and also problems related deepness.
In my idea.... trully separated amplifiers...double mono.... in different cases, different transformers...everything twin...will produce the good separation....and deepness..... in my point of view..sound stage is constituted in those main subjects.... separation and deepness....personal point of view folks.
Give your contribution to forum folks, to me, to the world, to the mankind.
Please, post your ideas...no problem if they dennie mine
Who told ya that i am the truth?
regards,
Carlos
Two separated supplies....two separated rectifier, two separated bank of capacitors helps a lot.
Two mono amplifiers, entirelly separated gives you more separation.
When left and rigth have the same volume...sounds seems that comes from the center point between the speakers....the differences in volume and in tonality creates to you the ambience... something that allow you to evaluate spatial position.... how loud some instrument is may create the deepness.
Sound stage, in my point of view is a brain creation...or a brain re-creation base in the microphones positioning during the recording.
The same way we have stereoscopic vision...the angle between your eyes to a certain "target" will be informed to the brain...that data is what reference your "thinking department"...called conscience, to analise the distance that target has related your eyes.... without two eyes we cannot evaluate distance correctly...or...at least will need the "long learning process" to adapt a single eye information to the new reality..as only one angle will be the input to brain.
The same way eyes plus brain evaluate distance..... our ears can detect position and distances too.
Phase of some instrument may he helpfull to brain too...this will be another information about distance...timing information.....well...i read that but i personally do not believe we can have all that precision...at least.... this not detected by conscience.
To better audition...use a dark room... reduce all external inputs...nothing to your vision...nothing to your stomach...cannot need to go to WC...cannot be hungry...must sit confortable and must be calm to evaluate sonics when comparing...reduce all other inputs to your brain.... keep only your ears working and focused.
Speaker must be at your ears level.... absorbing material must be around to absorb reflections to help you evaluate.
The position...left to rigth, depend on the separation of channels...and deepness of field depends that you have no "blend" into your amplifier...the biggest possible "impedance" from left to rigth channel....mixing them...blending..interconnecting or something alike will cancel a lot of signals that are inverted one each other related phase.... sound will be blurred, will loose details..as a result bad separation, bad horizontal positioning and also problems related deepness.
In my idea.... trully separated amplifiers...double mono.... in different cases, different transformers...everything twin...will produce the good separation....and deepness..... in my point of view..sound stage is constituted in those main subjects.... separation and deepness....personal point of view folks.
Give your contribution to forum folks, to me, to the world, to the mankind.
Please, post your ideas...no problem if they dennie mine
Who told ya that i am the truth?
regards,
Carlos
I agree DX.
If you can't get seperate supplies then matched components (resistors,transistors etc) and a good attenuator (ie stepped attenuator or accurate pot) are very worthwhile when looking for better imaging.
I'm using Tannoy coaxials at the moment with a stepped attenuator and the staging is now excellent. The biggest problem for me now are reflections from the side walls. The elephant in the room is .... the room!
I haven't heard any 'high end' speakers yet but I can't imagine listening to anything else except coaxials or maybe full range. Everything else just sounds un-natural to me because of phase issues.
I believe that phase is so important. Humans are designed to be sensitive to it. It is what keeps us alive when danger approaches and is a fundamental auditory cue.
If you can't get seperate supplies then matched components (resistors,transistors etc) and a good attenuator (ie stepped attenuator or accurate pot) are very worthwhile when looking for better imaging.
I'm using Tannoy coaxials at the moment with a stepped attenuator and the staging is now excellent. The biggest problem for me now are reflections from the side walls. The elephant in the room is .... the room!
I haven't heard any 'high end' speakers yet but I can't imagine listening to anything else except coaxials or maybe full range. Everything else just sounds un-natural to me because of phase issues.
I believe that phase is so important. Humans are designed to be sensitive to it. It is what keeps us alive when danger approaches and is a fundamental auditory cue.
Re: Better separation into stereo channels helps a lot
IME a better result is achieved by using separate supplies for each stage rather than for each channel. Probably because parasitic coupling between the stages through the ps destroys phase information.
Some may argue that properly designed circuit with current sources, current mirrors, cascodes etc should provide sufficient psrr but using separate PS always seems to improve the soundstage. The good thing is that the input stage can get away with a very modest transformer and filter caps.
destroyer X said:
IME a better result is achieved by using separate supplies for each stage rather than for each channel. Probably because parasitic coupling between the stages through the ps destroys phase information.
Some may argue that properly designed circuit with current sources, current mirrors, cascodes etc should provide sufficient psrr but using separate PS always seems to improve the soundstage. The good thing is that the input stage can get away with a very modest transformer and filter caps.
I was just thinking that since a large part of front to back layering and the ability for the speakers to disappear is phase related, that being able to mantain the phase of the signal as much as possible is important. However, speakers will play a much larger role in this than will the amp or preamp. What the amp and preamp do contribute to is what Charles said, balance between the channels, with as much channel seperation as possible. When everything is in the same case and share a supply and everything else, the capacitive coupling causes the channel seperation to become ever worse as you go higher in frequency.
What makes a power amp to have a better soundstage ?
I agree with everybody except aparatusonitus and GaryF
Carlos has also hit the nail right on the head with his observations.
Separate power supplies, decent attenuator, room acoustics. All of them.And don't forget wide bandwidth to preserve the harmonic structure. Most important.We may not be able to directly hear those harmonics, but they reduce the rise time of the waveforms, particularly evident with drum "whacks" ,where you start to feel them more. Most amplifiers are designed with too savage an input filter rolloff, in case of EMI.Why not try a ferrite bead there , if there is an EMI problem ?
Presently, I am getting close to almost TOO BIG a soundstage,
and some DTV is annoying me with all the antics in the TV studios as they switch between mono news, true stereo, psuedo stereo and advertisements with all of the previous.
No, I am not imagining it !
SandyK
I agree with everybody except aparatusonitus and GaryF
Carlos has also hit the nail right on the head with his observations.
Separate power supplies, decent attenuator, room acoustics. All of them.And don't forget wide bandwidth to preserve the harmonic structure. Most important.We may not be able to directly hear those harmonics, but they reduce the rise time of the waveforms, particularly evident with drum "whacks" ,where you start to feel them more. Most amplifiers are designed with too savage an input filter rolloff, in case of EMI.Why not try a ferrite bead there , if there is an EMI problem ?
Presently, I am getting close to almost TOO BIG a soundstage,
and some DTV is annoying me with all the antics in the TV studios as they switch between mono news, true stereo, psuedo stereo and advertisements with all of the previous.
No, I am not imagining it !
SandyK
What makes a power amp to have a better soundstage
You shouldn't need to turn off a TV to appreciate a Music Video, or the stereo soundtrack of a televised movie. The soundstage should not be that fragile. A good stereo soundstage often sounds better than some multi-channel systems, where some of the loudspeakers and electronics are compromised.
I agree that you can often appreciate a good CD even more with eyes closed, seated in a nice comfortable chair, and perhaps a glass of your favourite beverage nearby.Just relax, and listen to the music !
SandyK
You shouldn't need to turn off a TV to appreciate a Music Video, or the stereo soundtrack of a televised movie. The soundstage should not be that fragile. A good stereo soundstage often sounds better than some multi-channel systems, where some of the loudspeakers and electronics are compromised.
I agree that you can often appreciate a good CD even more with eyes closed, seated in a nice comfortable chair, and perhaps a glass of your favourite beverage nearby.Just relax, and listen to the music !
SandyK
What make a power am to have a better soundstage ?
Leolabs
Not necessarily superfast. I imagine that many recent SS Power amplifiers using the now common 30MHZ O/P devices
(3281,1302,5200 etc) could be made more than suitable with input filter rolloff changes etc.
I have attached a link to a post by the well respected English designer Graham Slee, as to why we should have wider bandwidth. (post 10) I have tried some of Graham's suggestions,and the soundstage is further improved, as well as localisation.
Many people may not agree with what Graham says, but
the improvements are there ,just as he says.
Other forum members, in various threads have also been advocating an increase in the rolloff frequency recently.
SandyK
http://rockgrotto.proboards39.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=149&thread=1173226796&page=1
Leolabs
Not necessarily superfast. I imagine that many recent SS Power amplifiers using the now common 30MHZ O/P devices
(3281,1302,5200 etc) could be made more than suitable with input filter rolloff changes etc.
I have attached a link to a post by the well respected English designer Graham Slee, as to why we should have wider bandwidth. (post 10) I have tried some of Graham's suggestions,and the soundstage is further improved, as well as localisation.
Many people may not agree with what Graham says, but
the improvements are there ,just as he says.
Other forum members, in various threads have also been advocating an increase in the rolloff frequency recently.
SandyK
http://rockgrotto.proboards39.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=149&thread=1173226796&page=1
What makes a power amp to have a better soundstage ?
Gaetan
The input rolloff filter is the major contributor to the amplifier's bandwidth. In the case of the Silicon Chip 15W Class Amplifier, which my amplifier is mainly based on, the original circuit had an input filter of 1K8/1N2 for a -3db point of 74KHZ. I found this limited audible performance, so for many years , I have been using 1K8/100pf. Recently I became of aware of several postings advocating no filter at all, or only a very small amount of HF rolloff. I have since changed to 470R/100pf, with a further noticeable improvement in soundstage and localisation/separation of instruments and voices.
You mentioned Destroyer X and AKSA. I have been able to listen to both these amplifiers. If you have been reading the "Destroyer X" thread, you will be aware that is based around the AKSA by Hugh Dean. Recently, the input filter of Destroyer X
was changed to give a higher rolloff frequency too, as recommended by various forum members, and verified in listening tests. BTW, Graham Maynard, who often visits the DX thread, was a very well known and respected technical writer in English electronic's magazines for many years. I read quite a few of Graham's articles when I was younger.
SandyK
Gaetan
The input rolloff filter is the major contributor to the amplifier's bandwidth. In the case of the Silicon Chip 15W Class Amplifier, which my amplifier is mainly based on, the original circuit had an input filter of 1K8/1N2 for a -3db point of 74KHZ. I found this limited audible performance, so for many years , I have been using 1K8/100pf. Recently I became of aware of several postings advocating no filter at all, or only a very small amount of HF rolloff. I have since changed to 470R/100pf, with a further noticeable improvement in soundstage and localisation/separation of instruments and voices.
You mentioned Destroyer X and AKSA. I have been able to listen to both these amplifiers. If you have been reading the "Destroyer X" thread, you will be aware that is based around the AKSA by Hugh Dean. Recently, the input filter of Destroyer X
was changed to give a higher rolloff frequency too, as recommended by various forum members, and verified in listening tests. BTW, Graham Maynard, who often visits the DX thread, was a very well known and respected technical writer in English electronic's magazines for many years. I read quite a few of Graham's articles when I was younger.
SandyK
Hello
I did read that article and the thread of Graham Slee.
I do agree about interconect cable capacitance, but how about the resulting input capacitance of a preamp or a power amp ?
As example, here's the input schematics of 3 excellent diy amps,(and for the Aksa 55 input, I presume it's very similar to the DX amp input)
How the interconnect would react with those amps input and do the total input capacitance of each of them (including Aksa) could have an indirect or direct relation with soundstage quality ?
The first input schematic are the DX amp, the second one are the Gem 100 amp, and the third are the symasym5 .
Gaetan
I did read that article and the thread of Graham Slee.
I do agree about interconect cable capacitance, but how about the resulting input capacitance of a preamp or a power amp ?
As example, here's the input schematics of 3 excellent diy amps,(and for the Aksa 55 input, I presume it's very similar to the DX amp input)
How the interconnect would react with those amps input and do the total input capacitance of each of them (including Aksa) could have an indirect or direct relation with soundstage quality ?
The first input schematic are the DX amp, the second one are the Gem 100 amp, and the third are the symasym5 .
Gaetan
Attachments
What makes a power amp to have a better soundstage
Gaetan
The schematic you have posted of DX is with the new revised input filter values.
Don't forget too, all the other things necessary to produce a good soundstage. e.g. Channel separation, which is further enhanced by separate power supplies. A regulated, and low noise PSU for the front end also helps in this regard, as well as helping with the S/N ratio. Much of the ambience information, which is needed to produce a good soundstage is at a very low level,so you also need as low as possible S/N in preceeding electronics stages such as CD/DVD player and preamplifier.A good quality multi position attenuator is also beneficial, as it helps with channel separation and ensures close channel balance. They also have a much higher bandwidth than even the best of the dual potentiometers.
It's an additive effect.
SandyK
Gaetan
The schematic you have posted of DX is with the new revised input filter values.
Don't forget too, all the other things necessary to produce a good soundstage. e.g. Channel separation, which is further enhanced by separate power supplies. A regulated, and low noise PSU for the front end also helps in this regard, as well as helping with the S/N ratio. Much of the ambience information, which is needed to produce a good soundstage is at a very low level,so you also need as low as possible S/N in preceeding electronics stages such as CD/DVD player and preamplifier.A good quality multi position attenuator is also beneficial, as it helps with channel separation and ensures close channel balance. They also have a much higher bandwidth than even the best of the dual potentiometers.
It's an additive effect.
SandyK
What makes a power amp to have a better soundstage
Mr. Greg.Erskine, Sir. Gentleman and Scholar.
Where did I say that Destroyer X was based on the AKSA 55 ? It was , of course based on an earlier AKSA (by another Aussie)
I didn't say which AKSA I listened to either.
The input filer capacitance in these examples is a helluva lot lower than the original 1N2 of the SC Class A, isn't it ?
That chilly wind has been whistling around, hasn't it ?
Kind Regards
SandyK
Mr. Greg.Erskine, Sir. Gentleman and Scholar.
Where did I say that Destroyer X was based on the AKSA 55 ? It was , of course based on an earlier AKSA (by another Aussie)
I didn't say which AKSA I listened to either.
The input filer capacitance in these examples is a helluva lot lower than the original 1N2 of the SC Class A, isn't it ?
That chilly wind has been whistling around, hasn't it ?
Kind Regards
SandyK
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.