I referred to SY's statement, not to reviews.
I'm cautious of blind tests; in at least some of them, people cannot distinguish between Tube and SS power amps (when the differences are big, significant and measured). For any test to be valid, blind or sighted, the validity of that test need to be established first, before drawing any conclusions from it. So far I haven't see it done in any test I know of.
Furthermore, to me, the one most important attribute of my sound setup is it's 'musicality', that is, the degree to which music reproduced by the setup is exciting, convincing and enjoyable. I don't care at all what does make my sound setup more 'musical' (to my taste). I don't care at all whether it is some 'real' sound qualities, or 'imagined' sound qualities, or any combination of those two. Hence, I don't care at all if there are things that I may imagine – as long as my setup is more 'musical', or more enjoyable and consistently so – that is all I care about. Since I listen to music at home sighted, I don't care at all how my setup may sound 'blind', or in 'blind tests'. Therefore, blind tests are absolutely useless to me. I care about the degree I enjoy listening to reproduced music, not in any 'scientific' proof of what makes it more or less 'musical', or enjoyable.
Also, I don't give much importance to reviews. Since among audio enthusiasts the personal tastes and preferences vary widely, what one would consider as superb sound quality, another may consider as mediocre, or low sound quality. Furthermore, whether a certain piece pf gear, say an interconnect cable, or a preamp, will sound better than another one, is also dependent on the entire setup. On a setup that tend to be 'dark', a preamp that sound 'bright' may well be preferred over another one, less 'bright' – and vice versa. Of course, other than 'brighter', or 'darker', the overall sound quality counts most.
This is the light of my own experience.
Anyhow, all the above being considered, when there are quite a few very good professional reviews of a certain product, my personal conclusion is that the said product sounds good, at least to some people's taste – and at least on some setups. Therefore, reviews do count, to a degree, though I wouldn't purchase anything on the basis of reviews only, without listening to it on my own setup. (An exception is my phono cartridge, which I couldn't listen to on my setup, before purchasing it).
I've never heard the CTC Blowtorch (nor any other design by JC). However, from the technical point of view, I can see the reasons why the CTC Blowtorch should sound superb. It refers to all the considerations of designing and building the CTC Blowtorch, as JC expounded on this thread over the years.
SY,
Unlike which others? I mean, isn't your design parameter list so basic that it can be easily delivered by any first or second year EE student armed with an IC op-amp? I think there must be more subtle factors involved in the formulation of John's successful designs besides those which, essentially, define a text book op-amp circuit. This touches a question I had posed to John some time ago on this thread. When does engineering science become engineering art? How does the engimeering approach differ between competently meeting engineering specs., and delivering an emotionally compelling listening experience? How do the technical design objectives differ? In the mesnwhile, I try to pay attention to John's design philosophy pronouncements, and read between the lines of his sometimes cryptic advice.
Last edited:
It's very simple. Start with exactly what you want the unit to do: gain, noise, signal levels, expected source, expected loads. From there, it's pretty straightforward if your goal is for the electronics to not have a sound. No ego involved, quite the opposite- it's trivially easy as long as the only criterion is the sound, not ability to impress chimp reviewers and sell into fashion markets (I would never think of challenging John is that respect). No guru mysteries, and it can even be done by a dumb chemist like me.
This is also my way of evaluating sound quality, as I elaborated above.
Quite a few times I tried a piece of gear on my setup that sounded good at first, but after a while, after few listening sessions on consecutive days, some flaws in the sound quality emerged.
I heard quite a few amps which are quiet, having flat frequency response, low distortion, low source impedance, and good stability – which don't sound good to me. Apparently, in the light of my own experience, all the above mentioned conditions are necessary, but aren't enough. (Many OpAmp based preamps would meet the above conditions, but wouldn't win listening tests. At least not my own listening tests).
I'm amazed with myself. How do I get these 'chimp' reviewers to give me A ratings on most, but not all of my designs? Parasound does not advertise anymore in the big mags.
I, at best, talk to one of the major magazine editors perhaps 5-10 minutes, once a year.
The last time I called the editor of TAS, he didn't return the call OR do me the favor of sending me a couple of extra copies of a specific issue that had my designs in it, more than normal.
I wish that I could find what I do have, unless it is an ability to design a successful audio product, to win friends and influence people. '-)
I, at best, talk to one of the major magazine editors perhaps 5-10 minutes, once a year.
The last time I called the editor of TAS, he didn't return the call OR do me the favor of sending me a couple of extra copies of a specific issue that had my designs in it, more than normal.
I wish that I could find what I do have, unless it is an ability to design a successful audio product, to win friends and influence people. '-)
I wouldn't know. Have you looked in catalogs and data sheets? Or did you mean to direct that question to someone else?
Hi John,
Do you really mind those who envy you?
Do you really mind those who think they can design and build a preamp that measures well (may be an OpAmp based one) and think that it will sound as good as the best of your designs?
I don't mind at all those who are smart in their own eyes, they only make me laugh.
I know from my own experience that there is no necessary correlation between published measurements results and sound quality. No one's words will make me deny my own experience.
Mr. Curl, I don't know you, nor you me, and can only percieve so much by your writings. I am trusting that you are being playfully sarcastic, which is a style all it's own if you will. I trust the tinges of bitterness and unhappiness is what we ignorant inbred rednecks in the south call "poor mouthing".
Looks to me, as a newcomer, that you have a lot of people on here paying you a lot of respect...respect, I might add, that I can assure you that the end purchaser of the commercial gear you designed will not even consider.
I am guessing you are aware of this.
I heard Halo JC-1, Halo JC-2, Halo A21, but never heard CTC Blowtorch. JC-1 and JC-2 are very good amplifiers, but definitely there are another designers and manufacturers who also offer very good amplifiers. Regarding A ratings in Stereophile, one can see very different topologies that all were A rated.
Well, aeronautical, I wish that I was rich, like many of my colleagues. But alas I am not bent to be a good businessman, and I just get along. What I DO, however, is to keep up on audio design the best way that I can. This takes my time and extra income, and it is a worthwhile avocation as well as major interest.
I have my opinions as to what it takes to make truly excellent audio equipment, and usually when it gets to the marketplace, my designs are accepted to be amongst the best available. That is all that I care for, and all that I get, except for a retirement income, barely covering my expenses.
Now, when I attempt to convey my personal experience as to what works in audio design, unfortunately a number of 'critics' tell me that I don't deserve to be taken seriously, because in their opinion, my successes are illusionary and really just fanciful product puffery. It gets old to not be able to express my personal opinion here on this thread, without being undermined by some critic of audio listening, itself. After years of this, I do grow tired.
I have my opinions as to what it takes to make truly excellent audio equipment, and usually when it gets to the marketplace, my designs are accepted to be amongst the best available. That is all that I care for, and all that I get, except for a retirement income, barely covering my expenses.
Now, when I attempt to convey my personal experience as to what works in audio design, unfortunately a number of 'critics' tell me that I don't deserve to be taken seriously, because in their opinion, my successes are illusionary and really just fanciful product puffery. It gets old to not be able to express my personal opinion here on this thread, without being undermined by some critic of audio listening, itself. After years of this, I do grow tired.
There is no doubt in my mind that there are other good amplifiers. (The power amp in my setup is produced by Pass Labs).
As I wrote above, which amplifiers one would prefer over another one, it is also given to both budget and personal taste and preferences.
It seems to me that for preamplifiers, FET's (the proper ones) are preferred over BJT's, possibly also tubes are also preferred over BJT's.
Also, no capacitors in the signal path is the highly preferred option – alas, usually impossible in tube amps (unless one goes for highly complicated circuits, which is a drawback in itself).
Also, minimum count of active (amplifying) parts is the highly preferred option.
Also , no GNFB is the highly preferred option.
Also, high open loop bandwidth and high slew rate are the highly preferred options.
All the above are found in the CTC Blowtorch simulations, or approximations, that were shown in this thread.
On top of that, the case and passive components, including the wires, have impact on sound quality. I know it also from my own experience, not only because of JC and others said so.
All the above are the reason I have such high regard to JC and some of his designs, though I heard none. It makes sense to me.
Again, I know for a fact that there are other good designs (some of them abide in my setup). So, yes, JC isn't the only excellent audio designer out there, though, in my mind, he is on the first raw of not too many.
This being a DIY audio forum, some of JC's designs (along with some others designs), are inspiring and are doable by DIY'ers, (doable at least to some degree).
Thanks for the reply Mr. Curl,
Although off topic I agree I would more than likely be jaded as well.
When I was in my early twenties I observed to my mentor that is wasn't fair that those who apply their knowlege are often building wealth for others...wealth that we don't share in proportionally. His answer was that "as unfortunate as it is, those who know how work for those who know why". That is a tragedy of society that I'm sure is shared by countless engineers on the site.
I can't fix that Mr. Curl but what I can do is to publically acknowlege your worthy contributions, whether they were properly rewarded or not, and I invite others do do so with me.
Hi John,
I haven't heard any good audio product from any of your critics.
The very good sounding audio products I heard were designed by designers who say very similar things to what you say.
I let the critics criticize, while I let the good designers design.
In the end, what gear sound very good to me have nothing to do with what people say.
Writing on the internet is free.
This is true and honorable on you part.
It will not stop those who may be envy and those who John's knowledge and experience undermine their preconceived notions bout audio and audio gear.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.