The idea that this is something 'special' points again to the 'anthropomorphism' I mentioned earlier - assigning a personality to a piece of hardware. Any amp can drive any type of load as long as the output capability meets the requirement. Amplifiers developed for audio are also used to drive shake tables for vibration analysis. Amplifiers developed to drive high voltage piezo-electric actuators drive ESLs just fine.
An amp is an amp is an amp. An amp has no concept of 'audio', has no concept at all of course. It's a piece of equipment.
Jan
To a person running a factory, it could mean a short hop over to the music store to get a replacement amp and up running in the same day. Probably started out by some industrial engineer that needed a quick fix for his quick changeover challenge. I'm still a bundle of nerves from working that quick change-over specialty job production line configuration challenge.
The first CAT scanners used a Crown Amp to drive the translate axis. That's where I learned it.
Last edited:
Again so what? In the middle of a complex control system you need a power drive at audio frequencies so you use what you can find.
This reminds me of a techician who was involved in mechanical servos. I have seen him at work in a lab during a summer job in 1968.
He was an audio fan, all the solid state amplifiers, he touched, had thermal runaway.
He never learned, his trash bin full of dead power transistors, he kept going ignoring the requirements of power amplifiers to drive DC motors in servo control loops.
Who knows if his amplifiers were sounding good at his place.
He was an audio fan, all the solid state amplifiers, he touched, had thermal runaway.
He never learned, his trash bin full of dead power transistors, he kept going ignoring the requirements of power amplifiers to drive DC motors in servo control loops.
Who knows if his amplifiers were sounding good at his place.
I have serviced and replaced the most advanced DC drives. Ironically the 'upscale' models have still chokes!!! as extra precaution.
Those without chokes would have less usable lifetime due to all interferences, in a typical room there was around 100 x 1 to 5 hp drives. Many with back-up resistor brakes.
Those without chokes would have less usable lifetime due to all interferences, in a typical room there was around 100 x 1 to 5 hp drives. Many with back-up resistor brakes.
I have spent the last 25 years looking at microphone and vibration data daily, processing it and playing filtered versions back in some of the best headphones (some of which come with dedicated equalizers).
Our understanding of psycho-acoustics is advancing but it is still very rudimentary. Just look at the latest standard putting forward a "Prominence Ratio" metric to get SOME handle on the tonal quality of a noise. This btw is to help people (like me) to set tonal targets for manufacturers and verify the noise performance of their products.
re: the (high) fidelity of audio reproduction and "not adding distortion" in the name of "truthful reproduction of the original": Once you made anything but a binaural recording at the entrance of your ear canals (usually with microphones built into a headphone set; the best ones even stick inside the ears), and decided not to listen by playing binaural streams back at the same (ear entrance) locations: you DO NOT have the information in the recorded signal which the brain requires to recreate the original listening experience of a person sitting in a particular position in the room with the band. Recording industry already knows that and thus will undertake recording one instrument at a time, mixing etc. to give you SOMETHING which you are free to manipulate further by choice of amps, equalizers, speakers, their placement, room effects, etc., to recreate an illusion of what had already been lost. For more info spend some time at Linkwitzlab website or attend seminars by professionals who deal with sound quality studies (e.g. HeadAcoustics).
as for amp distortion and NFB: Nelson Pass continued what Hiraga started way back, and there is a number of First Watt DIY amps now available to experiment with in the comfort of your home, which all have a particular distortion pattern, bandwidth etc. and sound a little different, (and Nelson acknowledges that by commonly saying "they all sound a little different to me and that entertains me"). Having made half a dozen of those so far I agree with him completely. The differences are subtle but for a critical listener very real. On the other hand all commercial amps with generous use of NFB and very low measured THD tend to sound the same (much like Peter Walker of Quad had claimed). Matching gear to the kind of music (recording), room and listening preferences is an endless source of audiophile pleasure.
I know better than to start trying to explain the differences by physics or else my hobby will start to resemble work, which would force me to look for another hobby
.
Our understanding of psycho-acoustics is advancing but it is still very rudimentary. Just look at the latest standard putting forward a "Prominence Ratio" metric to get SOME handle on the tonal quality of a noise. This btw is to help people (like me) to set tonal targets for manufacturers and verify the noise performance of their products.
re: the (high) fidelity of audio reproduction and "not adding distortion" in the name of "truthful reproduction of the original": Once you made anything but a binaural recording at the entrance of your ear canals (usually with microphones built into a headphone set; the best ones even stick inside the ears), and decided not to listen by playing binaural streams back at the same (ear entrance) locations: you DO NOT have the information in the recorded signal which the brain requires to recreate the original listening experience of a person sitting in a particular position in the room with the band. Recording industry already knows that and thus will undertake recording one instrument at a time, mixing etc. to give you SOMETHING which you are free to manipulate further by choice of amps, equalizers, speakers, their placement, room effects, etc., to recreate an illusion of what had already been lost. For more info spend some time at Linkwitzlab website or attend seminars by professionals who deal with sound quality studies (e.g. HeadAcoustics).
as for amp distortion and NFB: Nelson Pass continued what Hiraga started way back, and there is a number of First Watt DIY amps now available to experiment with in the comfort of your home, which all have a particular distortion pattern, bandwidth etc. and sound a little different, (and Nelson acknowledges that by commonly saying "they all sound a little different to me and that entertains me"). Having made half a dozen of those so far I agree with him completely. The differences are subtle but for a critical listener very real. On the other hand all commercial amps with generous use of NFB and very low measured THD tend to sound the same (much like Peter Walker of Quad had claimed). Matching gear to the kind of music (recording), room and listening preferences is an endless source of audiophile pleasure.
I know better than to start trying to explain the differences by physics or else my hobby will start to resemble work, which would force me to look for another hobby
.
Last edited:
You are at least honest in that, rather than seeking ultimate fidelity you are looking for pleasant sounding combinations as a relaxation from the days toil. That is a non-contentious position to hold.
Binaural is interesting. It's effectiveness does vary for me and sometimes doesn't work. I suspect playing with the EQ on my IEMs might make it more consistent when I have time.
Binaural is interesting. It's effectiveness does vary for me and sometimes doesn't work. I suspect playing with the EQ on my IEMs might make it more consistent when I have time.
Isn't it a strong sign, if not a proof that massive NFB is the way to go. The ultimate solution, with actual technology nothing to invent about power amplifiers . Time to focus on acoustics, loud speakers and listening room.
👏👏 Bravo! I sooooo agree. Please tell that to some of the 2 channel disciples on the Polk Audio forum. Some have this silly notion home theatre electronics can’t be used for 2 channel listening.
I have spent the last 25 years looking at microphone and vibration data daily, processing it and playing filtered versions back in some of the best headphones (some of which come with dedicated equalizers).
Our understanding of psycho-acoustics is advancing but it is still very rudimentary. Just look at the latest standard putting forward a "Prominence Ratio" metric to get SOME handle on the tonal quality of a noise. This btw is to help people (like me) to set tonal targets for manufacturers and verify the noise performance of their products.
re: the (high) fidelity of audio reproduction and "not adding distortion" in the name of "truthful reproduction of the original": Once you made anything but a binaural recording at the entrance of your ear canals (usually with microphones built into a headphone set; the best ones even stick inside the ears), and decided not to listen by playing binaural streams back at the same (ear entrance) locations: you DO NOT have the information in the recorded signal which the brain requires to recreate the original listening experience of a person sitting in a particular position in the room with the band. Recording industry already knows that and thus will undertake recording one instrument at a time, mixing etc. to give you SOMETHING which you are free to manipulate further by choice of amps, equalizers, speakers, their placement, room effects, etc., to recreate an illusion of what had already been lost. For more info spend some time at Linkwitzlab website or attend seminars by professionals who deal with sound quality studies (e.g. HeadAcoustics).
as for amp distortion and NFB: Nelson Pass continued what Hiraga started way back, and there is a number of First Watt DIY amps now available to experiment with in the comfort of your home, which all have a particular distortion pattern, bandwidth etc. and sound a little different, (and Nelson acknowledges that by commonly saying "they all sound a little different to me and that entertains me"). Having made half a dozen of those so far I agree with him completely. The differences are subtle but for a critical listener very real. On the other hand all commercial amps with generous use of NFB and very low measured THD tend to sound the same (much like Peter Walker of Quad had claimed). Matching gear to the kind of music (recording), room and listening preferences is an endless source of audiophile pleasure.
I know better than to start trying to explain the differences by physics or else my hobby will start to resemble work, which would force me to look for another hobby
This is interesting.
There is André Charlin (for those interested in classical music) who made very dynamic Records from reel-to-real in binaural pick-up microphones.
His records don't sound like typical records with manicured sound and exact stereo.
His records are more like mono with intense distortion and dynamics. He pushed the limited medium of vinyl to the extreme.
It is a real pity it is not available on digital, because maybe the cd would succeed where the needle fails. The needle cannot track most of the dynamics intensity of some parts of his pressing, resulting in distortion, still enjoyable but quite irritating to the ear. Or maybe I need a 12 inches arm to get it right?
I don't think I want to go there! Nobody with a strong belief will ever change it because of 'just facts and figures'.
But I feel your pain.
Jan
Yes, this is precisely what you would expect from an amp which is designed to amplify and do nothing else. All such amps should sound the same, which is confirmation that they are good enough at performing their task. Some people want something else, and there is a large industry out there which meets their needs too.koja said:
Recording from a simple stereo pair, replayed on speakers, can give a farly convincing illusion of reality without any equalisation, panning, mixing etc. I know that because many decades ago that is what I did to record friends' weddings. They were pleased (and in some cases somewhat astonished) to hear their own wedding in stereo.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.