I've read this thread from post #1 and seen lot of schematics, including Vendetta.
However, should you follow how the regulator I came up with evolved, you'll see I didn't copy anything.
Should I wish to copy anything, I'd do so to begin with – but may be not publish the fact that I'm copying.
Anyhow, the regulator I came up with, with the blessed assistance of John Curl, is similar to the Vendetta's Phono Amplifier – but not identical.
So?
Do you know of any BJT with noise figure similar to 2SK170?
syn08 said:
And, of course, that's all you care about. Real performance (line and load regulation, output impedance, etc...) is for real engineers only, isn't it?
Fellow human being,
I'm not ashamed to learn from anyone.
I'm definitely not ashamed to learn from the person who designed some of the finest audio gear, ever.
I'm not ashamed to give credit the people I learned from and was inspired by.
Please show me your design with REAL outstanding performance (by listening tests, not on paper) – and I'd be proud to learn from you and credit you.
syn08 said:
Decisions have to be made according to the circuit which the regulator feeds.
When lowest noise is desired for a constant current client – JFETs are best.
When lowest output Z is desired – MOSFETs are best.
Life needs compromises.
Audio circuit designs need compromises.
To each its' own.
Each specific circuit will dictate its' compromises.
stinius said:
No, I'm not a designer.
I didn't say I'm a designer.
This is a circuit I came up with – with the blessed help of John Curl.
However, I'm aware of some design considerations – which assist me to come up with some circuits.
And yes – the circuits I come up with, since I started reading this thread, are inspired by John Curl.
Anyhow, I wonder if your concern is an engineering one, or a personal one.
So – what is your concern?
syn08 said:
I'm now starting to collect these gemsI haven't had so much fun in ages
Now, if John would understand (or care) what kind of damage you bring to his own reputation... Really, and now I'm dead serious, to me it's a very sad picture. John deserves much more than this...
Do you care about John's reputation?
If you do – what is your input towards this end?
If you don't – what are you blubbering about?
JoshuaJoshua_G said:
First:
Why don’t you just use your first circuit?
Second:
I’m concerned about the reputation of JC, and that you are taking him with you in to the mud.
Like this thread has become he must answer for himself and also try to support you.
If you had any respect to JC you wouldn’t post whatever you came up with and expect John to support you.
It seems like you don’t have any respect at all to the people you are posting with, I don’t like that kind of behaviour. I respect JC, and if I didn’t respect him and his work I wouldn’t argue with him and I think that is the same with everybody else in this thread.
Stinius
Jakob2 said:
And psychoacoustics are based on averaged assumptions, not trained audiophiles and designers who handle 'sonics (sonic results are changed by the single change) changing' components in bit-by-bit incremental 'single cause analysis' experiments.
This then cascades into arguments like '640k ought to be enough for anybody', and similar type thinking.
I'm not arguing with you, just saying that when it comes to the human condition, averaging and 'black and white' measurements and statements bear little-to-zero resemblance to the scientific ideals. This is similar to any science that has not been around long or involves the human condition. This can make the nuts and bolts scientific crowd very itchy.
I usually carry out at least one single cause analysis experiment, in audio, every day. In the end, about 250-200... per year. Minimum. I get upset and restless when I'm not doing something every day of that nature.
john curl said:
it definitely does. the ear/brain combination is a fantastic editorialization and constructional device when it comes to pulling intelligence out of a difficult signal. However, we should not need to train the ear to dig through disgusting artifacts, we should leave it alone to relax into hearing (not 'fight to decode'- a very critical and important point!!!) a realistic portrayal of the original event. Doing so, at this time...requires a decent analog rig.
Listening to something that is a fabricated bit-by-bit 'simile' of an analog original is a fools game of the highest order, UNLESS the micro information is also included which in essence can be inter-channel 'timing cues' for spacial locational information.. This requires a high sampling rate. Once again, one that is capable of just over a clean sinusoidal signal of 100khz.
I proposed that exact point back in the early 90's on the alt.rec.high-end group..and explained exactly why. Funny how it took this long to make it true.
Tube amps rolled off at 15kz can do this better than any digital system - either in existence, proposed, or imagined.
Joshua_G I have used this design of yours as an example of good audio design.
For the record, I tried for months to come up with a better design than this for the new Vendetta phono input stage power supply regulator. I was unhappy with every other configuration, however, maybe someone, somewhere will show me an approach that I will ultimately find better. Please, those who know better, put up your circuit. I must warn you that I might not be too polite, if you really go off the rails with an inappropriate approach, after all the criticism of the existing circuit presented here.
For the record, I tried for months to come up with a better design than this for the new Vendetta phono input stage power supply regulator. I was unhappy with every other configuration, however, maybe someone, somewhere will show me an approach that I will ultimately find better. Please, those who know better, put up your circuit. I must warn you that I might not be too polite, if you really go off the rails with an inappropriate approach, after all the criticism of the existing circuit presented here.
syn08 said:
Mr. Jung and yourself could use some lessons about high performance/low noise regulators, isn't it? Joshua, with John's friendly support, beat you hands down with his outstanding design. You'd better burn your credentials and hide in the woods after this!
And FWIW what is the load regulation?
Music signals are all complex ever changing transient draw situations that require perfection across the board under any and all complex transient loads.
Beyond basic stability and noise issues, the results of any possible linear or constant draw measurement is entirely irrelevant.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.