Hi, PMA,
Agree with you... Works in all directions.. I sometimes got interesting papers and schematics from ex-USSR, but I am still to get parameters for some parts used, and still more for the parts themselves... Was a kind of general agreement that USSR parts were no audio made, but only military rejects with little or no data available... So, difficult engineering with these, and a partial explanation of the US/Europe/Japan parts general use...
And Big Guys... Yes,.... But there are some here too in Europe and UK. Most are even NOT in the audio stuff making business, but were formerly technical journalists or scientists... AKSA named Walther from La Maison de l'Audiophile for Le Solstice... This guy worked hard with Jean Hiraga for years in the "L'Audiophile" journal (now defunct, sadly...).
Their master word was "simple topology with reproductible results" and a "straight wire with gain" approach... La Maison de 'Audiophile just sold (and still sells) parts and DIY kits based on these works. Back in 80's, they were first in Europe to IMPORT some Japanese semiconductors that are now our audio prefered ones (very risky business at the time).
This revue did a big effort : to have some interesting but obscure Japanese papers excerpts translated. Now if we consider things, when a guy translate from his native language into English (for instance), he just SPREADS cross knowledge an introduce some new threads maybe... All guys here are not professionals, and just post for more fun... Just my 2 cents...
Jbaudiophile
Agree with you... Works in all directions.. I sometimes got interesting papers and schematics from ex-USSR, but I am still to get parameters for some parts used, and still more for the parts themselves... Was a kind of general agreement that USSR parts were no audio made, but only military rejects with little or no data available... So, difficult engineering with these, and a partial explanation of the US/Europe/Japan parts general use...
And Big Guys... Yes,.... But there are some here too in Europe and UK. Most are even NOT in the audio stuff making business, but were formerly technical journalists or scientists... AKSA named Walther from La Maison de l'Audiophile for Le Solstice... This guy worked hard with Jean Hiraga for years in the "L'Audiophile" journal (now defunct, sadly...).
Their master word was "simple topology with reproductible results" and a "straight wire with gain" approach... La Maison de 'Audiophile just sold (and still sells) parts and DIY kits based on these works. Back in 80's, they were first in Europe to IMPORT some Japanese semiconductors that are now our audio prefered ones (very risky business at the time).
This revue did a big effort : to have some interesting but obscure Japanese papers excerpts translated. Now if we consider things, when a guy translate from his native language into English (for instance), he just SPREADS cross knowledge an introduce some new threads maybe... All guys here are not professionals, and just post for more fun... Just my 2 cents...
Jbaudiophile
Bon matin Jb,
je suis travaillé - oh sorry - I had worked as a research worker those times and we had had a possibility to purchase foreign IC circuits and components, so I took a chance to get enough experience with them. There had always been IC producer here in Czechoslovakia (TESLA) with a limited range of standard IC series, both analog and digital.
Regarding russian components, they had their own and it makes replacements difficult. Fortunately these days are over.
I think the best prove is a comparative test, and we try to do it, even with well known audio gear. Long-distance verbal comparation is quite difficult, probably impossible.
Pavel
je suis travaillé - oh sorry - I had worked as a research worker those times and we had had a possibility to purchase foreign IC circuits and components, so I took a chance to get enough experience with them. There had always been IC producer here in Czechoslovakia (TESLA) with a limited range of standard IC series, both analog and digital.
Regarding russian components, they had their own and it makes replacements difficult. Fortunately these days are over.
I think the best prove is a comparative test, and we try to do it, even with well known audio gear. Long-distance verbal comparation is quite difficult, probably impossible.
Pavel
Upupa Epops said:It is not so simply, Terry...Exist " natural " space and " pseudospace "... But it is for long talking... Good space give ( in look of amp ) very low distortion and correct designed PS, wrong space high distortion and big crosstalk....
WRT natural space and pseudo space... were you present at the
recording?
A lot of the work I have done is front ends for classical minimalist
recording engineers. So when you say real space do you know what
mics were used, what the venue was, did they use MS encode /
decode, what ADC's etc etc.... yes it is a long talk
However, my statement stands, the front end (of replay), DAC, still
has a huge impact. The ADC has more but you cannot control that
aspect. And I am not sure if you have listened to many ADC's, or
know intimately the circuitry of them, I do. Unfortunately, generally
speaking ADC's used in a lot of recordings are not to the same std
of most of our reply systems..... yes it is a long talk
But getting back to the threads real content, zero feedback front
ends versus feedback! Well I have built a number of front ends
for the recording side for classical recording engineers and they
usually preferred the zero feedback circuit iterations. This was
in direct comparison to the live source. Now my circuits differed from
the Blowtorch, I believe measured more linear, whether that is an
issue I am not sure.
So keep your sunglesses, and keep your winks, there are a few
people here who know very much what we are talking about and
have a lot of experience with the -whole- signal chain, right from
source.
It's OK to sit there with your replay system and profess to us all
how we are deluded, euphonic worshippers.
My yardstick is the real event, and the guys that record it.
Cheers,
Terry
_o_
Hi PMA,
Anyhow, as long as a disagreement is held to a courteous tone, I think they enrich the thread.
-Chris
As long as everyone posts respectfully, there is no problem. If someone wishes to disagree I believe there should be some examples from their own experience given. Otherwise it only appears as a difference of opinion with no experience to those who don't know the personalities involved.
Anyhow, as long as a disagreement is held to a courteous tone, I think they enrich the thread.
-Chris
PMA said:
I have not used the Millenia personally, but have heard a few
recordings that were done with it, have heard wavs that were A/B'd
to other mic pre's, (gordon) spoken to engineers who have used
it, know someone who was previously involved with the company.
From this -non direct- information, I would cautiously say that the
Gordon (and others) are a better pre amp WRT sounding truthfull
but natural.
A friend reported Tom Jung tried his (my friends) own 0 x FB pre
against the Millenia and preferred it.
The circuit, and many others that follwed since, really owe much to
a fellow compatriot, Graham Cohens original design.
However, the Millenia certainly speaks for itself, I believe there are
10's of thousands of channels in use, you can't argue with that.
WRT Meitner, I have not tried his products, but a friend recently
had the 8 x ADC and 8 x DAC racks. They were the best he had
ever heard. Unfortunately didn't get time to check them out.
I have a lot of respect for Meitner, very smart guy.
WRT ADC's I think the grimmaudio box (by Putzeys and company)
is probably the one to get.
Cheers,
Terry
anatech said:
Fully differential. We have quite a few design techniques that are
unique and get around typical open loop non linearities. So for
the moment we are keeping the lid shut. (sorry)
I can say that it is possible to get around 0.001% or sometimes
better wiith open loop if measurements are your king .
Also we tested quite a few front ends, many that measured very
similar, around 0.001% but sounded very different. Some did sound
quite inferior despite the good steady state measurement.
We also did many tests of purposly adding various combination
of even and odd harmonic content to the very low baseline
linearity. (take note Upupa) The results were enlightening and
somewhat contrary to many common belief.
And I am not, in any way detracting from Johns approach with
the Blowtorch, I believe it is excellent. As his clients have attested
to, getting to 0.00x% may not always be the primary goal. I believe
his product speaks for itself.
Cheers,
Terry
PMA said:I am sure that most of you are aware of the fact that "sweet tube pleasant sound" is usually created during recording/mastering by selection of proper equaliser or DSP, all in solid-state circuits ....
Unfortunately, that is the over simplification of the century and
mostly wrong.
Most of the sweet tube sounds -are- sweet tube sounds of stuff
like Telefunken V72 mic pres etc. The pc plug-ins don't really do
the real thing justice.
Other popular coloration boxes are Neve SS pre amps. Pultec EQ's
the list is endless, but they are real boxes, some of them hand
built point to point wired.
The latest craze, apparently, is Germanium transistor based
mic pre's (chandler)
Also don't forget IP/OP coupling transformers.
Analog tape distortion (H3).
Plate reverbs... yummy
You may actually find it interesting that David Chesky uses almost
100% tube signal path (except for ADC) in his minimalist recordings.
This is really drifting from the threads intent and the subject can not
even remotely be covered here. However it is a subject many of us
would benefit from. Very interesting, especially when you actually
hear what some of it does. Very very difficult to make
generalisations about this stuff.
There is a great book I read recently called "Temples of Sound",
about all the original recording studios and gear used in them.
Cheers,
Terry
Terry,
everybody who has worked with low distortion stuff knows that even 0.001% THD measuring devices do sound different. A good example is OPA134 and OPA627 as a unity gain buffer, though below the declared number they do sound different. Spectral measurement of THD is only one small element of wide set of needed measurements. What I declare is that vera low THD is necessary, but not satisfactory condition of a good amplifier.
Regards,
Pavel
everybody who has worked with low distortion stuff knows that even 0.001% THD measuring devices do sound different. A good example is OPA134 and OPA627 as a unity gain buffer, though below the declared number they do sound different. Spectral measurement of THD is only one small element of wide set of needed measurements. What I declare is that vera low THD is necessary, but not satisfactory condition of a good amplifier.
Regards,
Pavel
Simple is better. Thats a fact. Apart from the fact that simple circuits require more ideal working conditions. So to to me it where you spend your effort. making circuits with superb noise rejection or you spend your time making ideal power supplies. Anyway This is an exelent thread to follow for a non skilled audio designer addict. Much knowledge to gain and only time to spend.
Love it!!! thanks for postings and please don't let religious extremisem set the agenda
Michael Børresen
www.eben.dk
Love it!!! thanks for postings and please don't let religious extremisem set the agenda
Michael Børresen
www.eben.dk
You didn't get it
Simple designs moves the requirement to the PSU. And for a simple circuit that sounds marvelous just look at a risistor biased 6H30 tube. Simplicity in all its beauty. and well sounding and terrbly distorted. As you pointed out earlier low distortion does not equal great sound. There's more to the equation than that. You know that!! but you also claim that low distorion is a requirement for good sound and then in my book you write solutions that has less tha low distortion. In an earlier post I said were are not able to measure good sound we must hear it. And we can do that regardless of the poor speakers we use. So again we must solder and experiment and listen!!
I belive that is all the blowtorch is about.
Michael Børresen
www.Raidho.dk
Simple designs moves the requirement to the PSU. And for a simple circuit that sounds marvelous just look at a risistor biased 6H30 tube. Simplicity in all its beauty. and well sounding and terrbly distorted. As you pointed out earlier low distortion does not equal great sound. There's more to the equation than that. You know that!! but you also claim that low distorion is a requirement for good sound and then in my book you write solutions that has less tha low distortion. In an earlier post I said were are not able to measure good sound we must hear it. And we can do that regardless of the poor speakers we use. So again we must solder and experiment and listen!!
I belive that is all the blowtorch is about.
Michael Børresen
www.Raidho.dk
Michael,
what you wrote about me is only a part of truth. I often listen to classical music and I do not like it through tube amps. I can even tell (recognize) that recording was done through tube preamp. Me personally I am bored by euphonic sameness of the tube sound.
This does not say anything against your taste. I believe you like it and I respect it.
I said that low distortion is not the only satisfactory condition for a good sound, but id did not mean I liked the tube sound.
Regards,
Pavel
what you wrote about me is only a part of truth. I often listen to classical music and I do not like it through tube amps. I can even tell (recognize) that recording was done through tube preamp. Me personally I am bored by euphonic sameness of the tube sound.
This does not say anything against your taste. I believe you like it and I respect it.
I said that low distortion is not the only satisfactory condition for a good sound, but id did not mean I liked the tube sound.
Regards,
Pavel
- Status
- Not open for further replies.