Dear Jan,
I always listen to music in a subjective way...I do not know any other form of doing it.
I also chose my partner in a subjective way.
Best,
M.
I do too - I don't know of any other way!
But I thought we were discussion audible differences between equipment. Sorry for the confusion.
Jan
Yes, but which quantity to measure? And, who can confirm that the measured improvement accounts for the difference in sound?
Yes, but the experiment must be done before any opinion (or conclusion) is emitted. Here I see only opinions and no experiment...
Again, the expert tell us what to measure.
The opinion about sound quality is better than opinion about expected behavior given an accepted model or paradigm, which is most of the times, imperfect and transitory.
Then no advance in the art is to be expected...
I don't have the gear to measure complex attributes of the signal. Maybe those who have them may get interested in experimenting.
Best wishes,
M.
The current state of development of the processing of electrical audio signals has been able to detail even below the lower limits of human perception. Trying to develop a hardware even more complex than the current, to reproduce even smaller details would not make much sense than academic.
I have excluded transducers from this consideration. I only consider electronics, for this moment.
The ear alone is not a precise instrument to give a verdict about a certain technical implementation. As proof of this, I am going to propose you a very simple test:
I propose that you try to give an order to the 4 sound files that I will upload according to the degree of distortion that you think you perceive. Then, assign the percentage of distortion that you think each of them has and, if you dare, show what form of distortion they might have.
Disables any spectrum analyzer that you have when reproducing them, since that would make it easier to distinguish visually any difference.
After you give an order to those files, I will upload the specific order that those files have and the percentage and type of distortion they have.
The files have an .asc extension, but simply rename to .wav in order to play them.
This simple and imperfect test is with tones of constant amplitude. If we tried to discriminate more complex files, masquerades and many other things would come into play, which would make the test even more difficult.
Best regards
PD: Many implementations can represent a placebo and induce the listener into false perception by the mere fact of knowing that these implementations are in the circuit, which does not mean that differences can really be perceived.
PD2: With a little effort and time, you can make a schematic circuit "sing" literally. I've done it with Multisim 14 and LabVIEW. That way, you can verify if the implementations make audible difference. See DLH amplifier.
I have excluded transducers from this consideration. I only consider electronics, for this moment.
The ear alone is not a precise instrument to give a verdict about a certain technical implementation. As proof of this, I am going to propose you a very simple test:
I propose that you try to give an order to the 4 sound files that I will upload according to the degree of distortion that you think you perceive. Then, assign the percentage of distortion that you think each of them has and, if you dare, show what form of distortion they might have.
Disables any spectrum analyzer that you have when reproducing them, since that would make it easier to distinguish visually any difference.
After you give an order to those files, I will upload the specific order that those files have and the percentage and type of distortion they have.
The files have an .asc extension, but simply rename to .wav in order to play them.
This simple and imperfect test is with tones of constant amplitude. If we tried to discriminate more complex files, masquerades and many other things would come into play, which would make the test even more difficult.
Best regards
PD: Many implementations can represent a placebo and induce the listener into false perception by the mere fact of knowing that these implementations are in the circuit, which does not mean that differences can really be perceived.
PD2: With a little effort and time, you can make a schematic circuit "sing" literally. I've done it with Multisim 14 and LabVIEW. That way, you can verify if the implementations make audible difference. See DLH amplifier.
Last edited:
Dear Jan,
Guess which trascendental book on audio power amplifiers arrived to my door...
Linear Audio | your tech audio resource
You cannot say I am not trying...
Many thanks.
M.
Guess which trascendental book on audio power amplifiers arrived to my door...
Linear Audio | your tech audio resource
You cannot say I am not trying...
Many thanks.
M.
Guys,
I found a review for one Lavardin amp with laboratory measurements, but the PDF is too heavy to be posted here. Please go to:
Lavardin IT Integrated Amplifier Review & Test | Hi-Fi | Review | AVHub
...and download the PDF at the bottom of the page.
Cheers,
M.
I found a review for one Lavardin amp with laboratory measurements, but the PDF is too heavy to be posted here. Please go to:
Lavardin IT Integrated Amplifier Review & Test | Hi-Fi | Review | AVHub
...and download the PDF at the bottom of the page.
Cheers,
M.
"Fact A:
A French audio manufacturer, Lavardin, claimed the discovery of a previously neglected circuit characteristic, which they called "circuit memory". The root of phenomenon was, according to them, signal-induced thermal drifts in transistors. They developed an amplifier which supposedly eliminated this phenomenon.
Fact B:
Said amplifier got reviews to die for. Audio critics got hysterical. JM Lab uses it to power their Utopia line of loudspeaker in demos. However, the manufacturer in question being French, having limited production capacity, and expensive prices (although no so by audio standards), the scandal somehow faded as few people (not including me) could test listen the amplifier. Lavardin, however, seems to be doing good business.
Fact C:
When there's smoke there's fire.
What Now ?"
Try and find some real facts. He uses extreme examples to make his point ( 1 and 10hz signals ) how much effect is actually audible we don't know. And if you believe the reviews in audio rags I have some snake oil for sale.
A French audio manufacturer, Lavardin, claimed the discovery of a previously neglected circuit characteristic, which they called "circuit memory". The root of phenomenon was, according to them, signal-induced thermal drifts in transistors. They developed an amplifier which supposedly eliminated this phenomenon.
Fact B:
Said amplifier got reviews to die for. Audio critics got hysterical. JM Lab uses it to power their Utopia line of loudspeaker in demos. However, the manufacturer in question being French, having limited production capacity, and expensive prices (although no so by audio standards), the scandal somehow faded as few people (not including me) could test listen the amplifier. Lavardin, however, seems to be doing good business.
Fact C:
When there's smoke there's fire.
What Now ?"
Try and find some real facts. He uses extreme examples to make his point ( 1 and 10hz signals ) how much effect is actually audible we don't know. And if you believe the reviews in audio rags I have some snake oil for sale.
To the same topic there are additional this threads:
Memory distortion, crap or serious?
Aleph (Single Ended) + Larvadin (no Memory Distortion) = Ultimate Aleph?
Memory distortion, crap or serious?
Aleph (Single Ended) + Larvadin (no Memory Distortion) = Ultimate Aleph?
My conclusion comes from reading the claims about "memory distortion".
I see two lines, one based on fake science about electrons, solid state physics which is a joke, another one based on thermal effects in transistors which cannot result in any significant audible effect in a decently designed amplifier. All of this is embeded in mumbo jumbo, with all known signs of fakery.
Crap, defenitely. A sucker is born every minute.
I see two lines, one based on fake science about electrons, solid state physics which is a joke, another one based on thermal effects in transistors which cannot result in any significant audible effect in a decently designed amplifier. All of this is embeded in mumbo jumbo, with all known signs of fakery.
Crap, defenitely. A sucker is born every minute.
Then your statement comes from personal opinion.
I imagine you read the article by Hephaïstos in your (I think) native language which contained some laboratory experiments (and bibliography) which I am not capable of criticize, but perhaps you can...it would be very edifying for us if you could do a technical analysis of that part of the article.
La distorsion thermique (Héphaïtos)
A scientist must experiment.
An opinologist is forced to opine...
Yet this statement is VERY easily demostrated or rejected...
Apparently, Mr Hephaïstos died tragically years ago...Your comment is not very delicate...
Peace.
M.
Hello
Could you suggest a practical circuit of a bootstrap cascode input ?
Maby something like the circuit in my image, does this circuit would have less memory distortions ?
Thank you
Bye
Gaetan
Attachments
Last edited:
Dear Gaetan8888,
I kindly invite you to join the conversation on the thread https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/sol...mplifier-gentleman-memory-21.html#post5700991
We are finalizing a functional amp with different options for input section experimentation: for anyone interested in real life experimentation, that is.
The following sections of the amp must also be addressed to enjoy the potentials of the putative LTMD strategy.
Cheers,
M.
Hello
I will join the conversation on the thread, I've seen your amp, it's a bit more complex that I like to do.
Thank
Bye
Gaetan
Mr Evil did some comparative measurements as well as simulations of Rush and LTP input stages several years ago. The spectra affirm most comments already made in the thread so I leave it to others to draw their conclusions about this topology: Mr Evil's Realm - Rush Cascode Input Stage
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.