I used it to allow squashing all the parts into the tightest possible construct. Doing it in 2-D, well anybody can do that...where's the fun in that??
I did it because I could. I did not attempt to quantify any differences, but did note that the setup seemed impervious to local noise/interference. The actual object was a PA setup, I tried to make it as portable as possible without sacrificing sound quality. It grew legs during a system teardown..
Using twisted wires will certainly buy the amateur most of the EMC benefits. It will increase anomoly rejection generated externally as well as internally. The supply wiring aspect was for the internal "noises", as going tight on the packing put all the sensitive circuits in close proximity to lots of current slew at high bandwidth. The concepts are to stop creating the fields, and stop the reception of the fields.
jn
With regard to improvements in the audio field, to me that's a side issue. Over 25 years ago I got a shock when I accidentally achieved a state of system tune allowing me to hear what I call the "good stuff": sound quality that's at a level where the ear/brain no longer has to struggle to decode what it's hearing, the illusion of a musical event is effectively 100% convincing. People have used many terms over the years for sound like this: magic, liquid, organic, etc; they're all talking about the same thing, or a part therof.
Which means that 25 years ago all the elements were in place for high quality sound to be always achieved. Except, the awareness of people in the audio industry that such was the case; and we are still in the same position today. A relatively small number are aware of what is possible, and the remainder are highly sceptical, or outright disbelieving that such is the case.
So, at least part of the challenge is to get more people on board to appreciate that very high standards of replay are possible, if sufficient care in precisely the right areas is taken ...
Frank
Which means that 25 years ago all the elements were in place for high quality sound to be always achieved. Except, the awareness of people in the audio industry that such was the case; and we are still in the same position today. A relatively small number are aware of what is possible, and the remainder are highly sceptical, or outright disbelieving that such is the case.
So, at least part of the challenge is to get more people on board to appreciate that very high standards of replay are possible, if sufficient care in precisely the right areas is taken ...
Frank
No, different set of skills. And within each of these, people vary in sensitivity to different stimuli. Someone who might be extremely sensitive to phase and level might not have any sensitivity to HF extension, for example.
The virtues of a complementary monolithic I fail to see, but still have more A1349/C3381 than I'll ever need, MAT0*, same same for the non-bjt variant of the 2SA/2SC.
Pre '70s:
- CNC'd/Monocoque cases ?
- Low inductance meanderband/plate/thickfilm resistors, dressed or obscene ?
- Surface/heatsink mounted ones of extreme accuracy ?
- Stellar grade ceramic-filled insulator material ?
When I put on a CD, I listen to the output of a signal that went through several multi-layer boards, with sota discrete components from the last decades, temp-compensated and honed to optimum performance, nothing '70s there.
Just looking at what the Constellation team has done on the insides of their phono/preamp models turns me in awe, nothing '70s either.
For "quantum" devices, one should get over it, and move along with NOS/SMT, history has repeatedly shown a knack of going back and forth.
(désolé, on the wine front, I never got passed rouge by the FF2 glass outside of the abbaye de Cluny.
-y )
Last edited:
At least I learned two things from you:
If somebody is able to recognize his son in a crowd, it is because he has a better view than his neighbor.
And the second one: the best illusionist is the one able to believe in his own magic tricks.
My problem is I'm not clever enough to can apply this new knowledge in a productive way.
Just, there is a little thing that tickles me, we are several, here, with various technical backgrounds, to disagree sometimes with you on some points, mostly about magic, while we agree between us with good argues. It never warns you a signal ?
Last edited:
Thermal balance and pairing ?
,- CNC'd/Monocoque cases ? What dB it gives ?
- Low inductance meanderband/plate/thickfilm resistors, dressed or obscene ? Yes, and tantalum etc. but they were more expensive.
- Surface/heatsink mounted ones of extreme accuracy ? I am not sure to had understood , but nice anodized heatsink and profiles, we had, yes.
- Stellar grade ceramic-filled insulator material ? We had thin micas, thermal paste, no problem.
Realy, the only real big changes i see are SMD and multi-layer printed boards. More a change for mass products.
Well, it seems we look at the same glass, you see it half full, while i see it half empty...or the contrary.
Everyone, I have to declare once more that I have never lied on this thread, to the best of my knowledge. I could be wrong about something, just like anyone else, but I have NEVER deliberately lied to anyone about anything here. It would be political 'suicide' to do so, and it would never be forgotten by most of my critics here.
Have I always been right? I doubt it, because nobody is perfect, but my chances of being right are reinforced by my success in the audio world. Am I rich? No way, I am almost 'dirt poor', drive cars of 17 and 28 years age respectively, never travel anymore, and I have just enough in the bank to last a few months. (I get nervous when I don't have a prudent reserve, and during the duration of this thread, I have had to borrow money from friends, (not Jack Bybee) just to survive bankruptcy).
Now, I hope that this REAL image of who I am and how I do, demolishes any fantasy that I am some guy making big bucks in the audio world.
To be told that I come here to 'lie' to everyone is a slander of the highest kind. Why, I am slandered, I do not know, not really.
In any case, I stand by my position in audio.
Have I always been right? I doubt it, because nobody is perfect, but my chances of being right are reinforced by my success in the audio world. Am I rich? No way, I am almost 'dirt poor', drive cars of 17 and 28 years age respectively, never travel anymore, and I have just enough in the bank to last a few months. (I get nervous when I don't have a prudent reserve, and during the duration of this thread, I have had to borrow money from friends, (not Jack Bybee) just to survive bankruptcy).
Now, I hope that this REAL image of who I am and how I do, demolishes any fantasy that I am some guy making big bucks in the audio world.
To be told that I come here to 'lie' to everyone is a slander of the highest kind. Why, I am slandered, I do not know, not really.
In any case, I stand by my position in audio.
Last edited:
Esperado, what 'magic tricks' do I display? Really, I just don't know what say or how to respond to such an accusation.
Perhaps, you take offense to the marketing surrounding my name and the products that I design or help design.
I remember once, perhaps 20 years ago, I was at a Chicago CES (remember them everyone)? Someone muttered in my hearing that I was called a 'genius' in a non flattering way. What did I say? I said: 'Some say' and asked if I could answer any question that they may have on the audio equipment shown. They didn't know what to say, and went away. I wished that I could have helped them in some way, but I can't help the product advertising and 'puffing' that has surrounded my design efforts for almost 40 years now. What can I do? Deny it, publically? How do I do that? Have any overt lies been said about me in the product advertising? None that I know of.
Esperado, why can't we agree to disagree, without the insults? Can you do that? I bet if you ever met me, we could get along and agree on just about everything, including whether a bottle of wine is good or bad. '-)
Perhaps, you take offense to the marketing surrounding my name and the products that I design or help design.
I remember once, perhaps 20 years ago, I was at a Chicago CES (remember them everyone)? Someone muttered in my hearing that I was called a 'genius' in a non flattering way. What did I say? I said: 'Some say' and asked if I could answer any question that they may have on the audio equipment shown. They didn't know what to say, and went away. I wished that I could have helped them in some way, but I can't help the product advertising and 'puffing' that has surrounded my design efforts for almost 40 years now. What can I do? Deny it, publically? How do I do that? Have any overt lies been said about me in the product advertising? None that I know of.
Esperado, why can't we agree to disagree, without the insults? Can you do that? I bet if you ever met me, we could get along and agree on just about everything, including whether a bottle of wine is good or bad. '-)
Last edited:
Trinkets? Where have I promoted 'trinkets'. Do you mean that I have defended 'tweaks' or 'trinkets' made by others? Yes, I defend the right to try anything that might improve audio reproduction, EVEN if I can't make sense of it from my education and experience. I call it: "Keeping an open mind" perhaps others call it something else.
Wow! You remembered! I'd bet there are many on this DIYAudio who have no idea where a lot of the ideas they use came from or are reinventing the wheel As in the low Z foil cable connecting a remote supply to my MC pre-preamp: -->
Thx-RNMarsh
Attachments
Last edited:
+1, i told-you the same thing several time, John.
On my point of view, the first thing to do is to understand a phenomena if any (well defined in its environment) and correlate-it with know laws of physic or acoustic.
Most of us are really shocked when you go out of the logic or try to defend or promote the indefensible. And your unreserved admiration for all audiophiles overpriced products, whatever their quality, does not help to give credit to your image as an audio designer.
This said, disagreeing with you does not mean we hate or insult-you in anyway. It is a forum, we are here to exchange *opinions* and argues.
If you knew about me, you will laugh of yourself, elektroj.
Did-you mean that maintaining a scientific attitude as rigorous as possible when we work on technology kill our right brains ? Do-you think that real artists are not rigorous as well ?
Last edited:
Such a position can be counter-productive for high-quality audio, since nobody up to now has managed "to understand a phenomena and correlate-it with know laws of physic or acoustic" even listenable effects of a single capacitor. I refere here, again, that measurements do not say much for audio perfectioning at top quality levels.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.