Nigel, what I find bizarre is that I mention the approach, the measures that are required to achieve the quality of sound that you're talking about, in reproduction - and the antagonism and the negativity that can arise is quite remarkable - people want "good sound", but reject, sometimes quite vehemently, an approach which is very effective - it doesn't fit in with their Weltanschauung, and therefore can only be nonsense ...
.Excellent . How do you feel about inter-winding screen ? I have doubts myself .
Toroids are interesting . Run right to the limit as is usual they are very prone to DC mains components disrupting them . E & I is a different animal and might be better if high end . Reality says it is likely to be toroid . My brother said most people have too much PSU capacitance and thus have a dancing with divers boots syndrome . As he pointed out a well designed amp should not need that . That is the zero volts is reasonably at zero volts . The famed common mode rejection ratio should do the rest . I side with Douglas Self when he says no one will hear a positive improvement when excessive capacitance is fitted . Actually small caps often sound better . My brothers rule of thumb might explain why we need big transformers . They make the amp sound less like divers boots if we choose to have so many caps . If we draw high current we must have caps that will survive . High grade high ripple current 22000 uF is all you need . 4700 uF on the outputs will do no harm . Problem is it probably will be those doing most of the work as they are local to the output device . I suspect a small air cored 20 A ( 2 mm ) choke might join the CLC well . It would be a RF biased solution and could be hand wound . Thus the 220 uF usually fitted to counteract inductance when 4700 uF could be made to work for us .
One way big PSU's might work is that when clipping the ripple does enter the amps mechanisms . If so , fair enough . Fuel for class G I think if so ? Myself I run the driver stage - 5 V with a ripple free VAS . If an RC filter short R if wanting more power . The clipping behaviour is nice . My primitive amp had a posh version . VAS + 5 V is not my cup of tea .
Divers boots might be LC time constant .
Nigel, what I find bizarre is that I mention the approach, the measures that are required to achieve the quality of sound that you're talking about, in reproduction - and the antagonism and the negativity that can arise is quite remarkable - people want "good sound", but reject, sometimes quite vehemently, an approach which is very effective - it doesn't fit in with their Weltanschauung, and therefore can only be nonsense ...
I have good faith that suited to small scale classical works . The class G looks to provide the mad moments . Cake an eat it too . I listen to many 78's . They search out the system . Usually a quaint sound for most people . On a good system with high neutrality a time machine . I can still hear Africa in these voices . You will struggle with this one . For 78's I need 50 kHz speaker bandwidth . The older ones need the most . It also has to be sweet . That's very bright and sweet as sweet .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWt8KK_Cvfo
This also . This possibly is the most accurate recording of music I have ever heard . However this music has inbuilt hi fi qualities . I have heard it played in anechoic conditions and it sounds mostly the same . Hayden is destroyed by anechoic . Listen for harmonics of the strings .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nPXN7IFUSY
Plitron and a few others used to offer medical grade trafo and i have never heard an R core that didnt Buzz...
Any input on your take why Spectral amplification is sold only with MIT cabling and dedicated Pre..
Weltanschauung
I had a four hour discussion about this with a very beautiful German journalist . We asked if the German language caused WW2 . We concluded it did . Words exist in German to knock you down to size . They say " you are not as intelligent as you think as there is a word for that " . The English have a cup of tea instead . Mind control .
The guys including her husband said eventually " what have you guys been talking about " . " Shakespeare " we said .
I had a four hour discussion about this with a very beautiful German journalist . We asked if the German language caused WW2 . We concluded it did . Words exist in German to knock you down to size . They say " you are not as intelligent as you think as there is a word for that " . The English have a cup of tea instead . Mind control .
The guys including her husband said eventually " what have you guys been talking about " . " Shakespeare " we said .
Last edited:
Hi Nigel,
What I meant is that when building the optimal reproduction system factors which have to be taken into account are complex and it will always be a compromise. Most audiophiles I know are obssesed with some vintage equipment claiming that it reveals something that is supposed to be the true sound. When I discuss with them possible measurement or blind A/B tests they either avoid the subject or assure me that meassurement doesn't mean anything as long as it sounds right.
What is the objective approach when I don't hear the same good sound, only low-fi distortion. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder but we are dealing with mostly technical matter. So the conclusion from such argument is that both sides are correct or at least not convinced.
I admit I have almost no knowledge it the field of psychoacoustics but at least being a physicist I don't fool myself that certain overprised item will miraculously make my listening experience jaw-dropping when measuring it's contribution seems to change nothing special only adding pleasant sounding distortion.
I don't understand what learning a language has to do with enjoying something different than literature. Obviously I can't enjoy Shakespeare the way a native English speaker does but it doesn't mean that I am incapable to find pleasure in music. I didn't mean to be offensive with my post just expressed an opinion about my priorites when i deal with equipment.
What I meant is that when building the optimal reproduction system factors which have to be taken into account are complex and it will always be a compromise. Most audiophiles I know are obssesed with some vintage equipment claiming that it reveals something that is supposed to be the true sound. When I discuss with them possible measurement or blind A/B tests they either avoid the subject or assure me that meassurement doesn't mean anything as long as it sounds right.
What is the objective approach when I don't hear the same good sound, only low-fi distortion. I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder but we are dealing with mostly technical matter. So the conclusion from such argument is that both sides are correct or at least not convinced.
I admit I have almost no knowledge it the field of psychoacoustics but at least being a physicist I don't fool myself that certain overprised item will miraculously make my listening experience jaw-dropping when measuring it's contribution seems to change nothing special only adding pleasant sounding distortion.
I don't understand what learning a language has to do with enjoying something different than literature. Obviously I can't enjoy Shakespeare the way a native English speaker does but it doesn't mean that I am incapable to find pleasure in music. I didn't mean to be offensive with my post just expressed an opinion about my priorites when i deal with equipment.
The Vintage is easy . They were forced to do good engineering . Money was not abundant and they set a minimum standard . Like motorcars things have gone mad .
Mazda MX 5 is about the safe limit of car design ( unsafe in my hands ) . I hate it's looks , so reluctant to buy one . Porsche , point and squirt machine . A low grade VW Golf . I like them . If I had one I would de-tune it ( like I do with amplifiers ) . Mercedes E class diesel ( CD 0.24 ) . Best car I have ever been in . A rocket ship . I strongly dislike the brand so genuine praise . Hi fi resembles this . I am not so car obsessed as on trip to the supermarket usually results in a bump . Golf and Beetle are what I use . I used to buy British , alas no more .
I will tell you to buy a Quad 33 303 ( nostalgia that isn't ) . Set the tape input to high for your CD . You should have an amplifier you can trust . Certainly there are better . I say this because for a 1965/67 design it is almost as good as you need . In my experience I never had a CD player to equal it . The disc input is very poor . However they gave space to build your own . If you do it can work . The thing is you might become addicted to sound that is real . You will need fantastic speakers and perhaps not even Quads ( too dull and not like real music , lovely all the same ) . I never tried it with KEF LS 50 . I suspect it would work . Sugden A48 is the same and better . Sony TA5650 also . I hate Sony , so again high praise . In the modern era I take more convincing . Yamaha stand a chance . Dynaco A70 is OK .
Life is head and heart . The scientists of old were trained to have both . The heart I suspect is the device that makes the scientific leaps ? The heart is not that device that pumps blood . In hi fi we can also mistake components for the mechanism .
This guy I think agrees with me .
MJR7-Mk5 Mosfet Power Amplifier
Here is how hi fi usually is . Take a great poem and do this .
POEM: LEISURE BY WILLIAM HENRY DAVIES
Now to do some work .
Should we have a new thread . Objective verses measurements ?
I think you are 99% right . The 1% controls my life . It is called doubt .
I am 100% not offended and I am sure that is true of any here ? What I say is , daft , contradictory and insulting . They don't seem to mind . As I said to Dvv . " I don't trust anything anyone says , not least if I said it . "
Mazda MX 5 is about the safe limit of car design ( unsafe in my hands ) . I hate it's looks , so reluctant to buy one . Porsche , point and squirt machine . A low grade VW Golf . I like them . If I had one I would de-tune it ( like I do with amplifiers ) . Mercedes E class diesel ( CD 0.24 ) . Best car I have ever been in . A rocket ship . I strongly dislike the brand so genuine praise . Hi fi resembles this . I am not so car obsessed as on trip to the supermarket usually results in a bump . Golf and Beetle are what I use . I used to buy British , alas no more .
I will tell you to buy a Quad 33 303 ( nostalgia that isn't ) . Set the tape input to high for your CD . You should have an amplifier you can trust . Certainly there are better . I say this because for a 1965/67 design it is almost as good as you need . In my experience I never had a CD player to equal it . The disc input is very poor . However they gave space to build your own . If you do it can work . The thing is you might become addicted to sound that is real . You will need fantastic speakers and perhaps not even Quads ( too dull and not like real music , lovely all the same ) . I never tried it with KEF LS 50 . I suspect it would work . Sugden A48 is the same and better . Sony TA5650 also . I hate Sony , so again high praise . In the modern era I take more convincing . Yamaha stand a chance . Dynaco A70 is OK .
Life is head and heart . The scientists of old were trained to have both . The heart I suspect is the device that makes the scientific leaps ? The heart is not that device that pumps blood . In hi fi we can also mistake components for the mechanism .
This guy I think agrees with me .
MJR7-Mk5 Mosfet Power Amplifier
Here is how hi fi usually is . Take a great poem and do this .
POEM: LEISURE BY WILLIAM HENRY DAVIES
Now to do some work .
Should we have a new thread . Objective verses measurements ?
I think you are 99% right . The 1% controls my life . It is called doubt .
I am 100% not offended and I am sure that is true of any here ? What I say is , daft , contradictory and insulting . They don't seem to mind . As I said to Dvv . " I don't trust anything anyone says , not least if I said it . "
Last edited:
So if the distortion is pleasant and enjoyable by all, is it wrong ..?
Since nothing is perfect , distortion and compromises are around us constantly , in our daily lives , we choose to accept or not , when something sounds pleasant , looks pleasant , rides or drives pleasant to us , it's all due to our acceptance of what ever distortion is involved. The job for Science is to find this temporal balance , the acceptable distortion , since nothing is perfect , no one sits in a perfectly designed chair , we sit in the one most comfortable to us, same with audio.
Just saying ....
Since nothing is perfect , distortion and compromises are around us constantly , in our daily lives , we choose to accept or not , when something sounds pleasant , looks pleasant , rides or drives pleasant to us , it's all due to our acceptance of what ever distortion is involved. The job for Science is to find this temporal balance , the acceptable distortion , since nothing is perfect , no one sits in a perfectly designed chair , we sit in the one most comfortable to us, same with audio.
Just saying ....
So if the distortion is pleasant and enjoyable by all, is it wrong ..?
Since nothing is perfect , distortion and compromises are around us constantly , in our daily lives , we choose to accept or not , when something sounds pleasant , looks pleasant , rides or drives pleasant to us , it's all due to our acceptance of what ever distortion is involved. The job for Science is to find this temporal balance , the acceptable distortion , since nothing is perfect , no one sits in a perfectly designed chair , we sit in the one most comfortable to us, same with audio.
Just saying ....
Naughty of me , I can't let this go as it is important .
I would say it isn't distorted if it works . Discordant is objectionable to all . The rules in music are simple . Hi fi people choose to ignore music . Daft as it is the easy way . The rule might be . Zero distortion or like the ear ? To resist personal choice is to be a fool on steroids . To not know these things is to be a fool if trying to make a living . There is a sound most people like . Alas fatigue is not easily judged . The speaker I just made are very bright and forward . The lady who now owns them says they have very little listening fatigue .
Yes, I have noted that many audio people love "hifi" sound - like a stage production where the makeup is caked on, and the lights glarely brightly with different colours, intensely on parts of the stage, to make sure the audience knows where to look - natural sound doesn't make a big song and dance about itself; so people just walk straight past it - it's not "exciting" enough ...
When I first learned the word "high-fidelity" over 50 years ago, I understood it to mean that the sound should be as near a copy of a the natural sound as possible.
It appears the meaning the hi-fi has changed.
I agree with fas42, that true hi-fi is not good enough for large masses of consumers, as then all systems should sound nearly the same.
Sales people make their sales by emphasizing differences. This is fundamentally the problem in the consumer industry. Human nature, what it is, indicates there is no hope for this to change.
This website exists for the DIY to find their own way through all this confusion.
It appears the meaning the hi-fi has changed.
I agree with fas42, that true hi-fi is not good enough for large masses of consumers, as then all systems should sound nearly the same.
Sales people make their sales by emphasizing differences. This is fundamentally the problem in the consumer industry. Human nature, what it is, indicates there is no hope for this to change.
This website exists for the DIY to find their own way through all this confusion.
Having - over the past 5 years - heard 3 different but all top level string quartets play the same two pieces - in different venues - I would say that we really do need to give up the idea of 'closest to the original sound' when discussing audio playback. In the instances of string quartets mentioned, one played in the local (octagonal) church, one in a Georgian dedicated 'music room' in a large country mansion and one in a school assembly hall (with some acoustical treatment). In each case the music - and in particular the sound of individual instruments - was about as different as you could imagine possible.
In my earlier life I spent quite a lot of time in recording studios (some of the best in 1970s-80s London UK) and well know the characteristics of those studios….each was completely different. The 'modern' large scale studios were designed so that the recording engineers could manipulate the sound to their liking whereas the older studios had a good natural, but individual, sound of their own. The next 'variable' is the ears of the producer, the recording engineer and the mix engineer. And all of this without mentioning the recording equipment and its condition, set-up etc.!!! And with a 'Who' albumn the original recording was made in London with some tracks mixed in (The Record Plant?) in New York.
The point is that there are so many unknowns involved in every recording that to find a 'playback system' which is faithful to the source, i.e. the original music as played at time of recording, is totally impossible. Few of us have actually been in a studio recording area as a recording is been made, but I can say from experience that what you hear in the control room is not what you hear on the floor.
So, what can we hope to achieve?
At best a compromise system for replaying recordings in our own listening room in a manner which we (individually) most enjoy.
In my earlier life I spent quite a lot of time in recording studios (some of the best in 1970s-80s London UK) and well know the characteristics of those studios….each was completely different. The 'modern' large scale studios were designed so that the recording engineers could manipulate the sound to their liking whereas the older studios had a good natural, but individual, sound of their own. The next 'variable' is the ears of the producer, the recording engineer and the mix engineer. And all of this without mentioning the recording equipment and its condition, set-up etc.!!! And with a 'Who' albumn the original recording was made in London with some tracks mixed in (The Record Plant?) in New York.
The point is that there are so many unknowns involved in every recording that to find a 'playback system' which is faithful to the source, i.e. the original music as played at time of recording, is totally impossible. Few of us have actually been in a studio recording area as a recording is been made, but I can say from experience that what you hear in the control room is not what you hear on the floor.
So, what can we hope to achieve?
At best a compromise system for replaying recordings in our own listening room in a manner which we (individually) most enjoy.
Last edited:
I share your doubts. In theory they're a boon, but they do have to be connected to earth and the cleanliness of that earth connection isn't guaranteed. Even if there's a perfectly clean earth in the wall socket, the inductance between that and the trafo is going to be significant.
article refs? reseachers names? - just where is this loop?
a very unique claim given the realities of biological systems information usually being transferred by diffusion of neurotransmitters and most neurons saturating at 4-8k pulses per second
many mis/overinterpret the interaural time delay resolution of few us to imply 100s of kHz "hearing" - but the test signals are strictly band limited with no > 20kHz components
the precise mechanism may still be a subject of research - but from a signal processing perspective a correlation process doesn't require any such supersonic hearing
using correlation you can trade S/N, observation time for raw time resolution in precisely measuring time delays of similar signals
Last edited:
Ok, question for you audio Einsteins .
A while back I grabbed an eBay lot of 12 medical grade (screened) 240V to 225V, 225VA toroidal transformers....$10 each !.
I have not extracted the digit in order to do anything with these yet.
So, suggestions are open on how to use these.
Initial thoughts is to connect two such transformers back to back.
I also consider to use four such transformers, with primaries wired in series, and secondaries wired in series.
My thoughts are that either arrangement gives possibilities regarding filtering....DVV, perhaps you have suggestions.
Currently I am trialling a Belkin PureAV filter box.....it does lessen subjective noise, but also adds another dislikeable 'character' to the system sound...I blame the ferrite cores, perhaps.
Dan.
.A while back I grabbed an eBay lot of 12 medical grade (screened) 240V to 225V, 225VA toroidal transformers....$10 each !.
I have not extracted the digit in order to do anything with these yet.
So, suggestions are open on how to use these.
Initial thoughts is to connect two such transformers back to back.
I also consider to use four such transformers, with primaries wired in series, and secondaries wired in series.
My thoughts are that either arrangement gives possibilities regarding filtering....DVV, perhaps you have suggestions.
Currently I am trialling a Belkin PureAV filter box.....it does lessen subjective noise, but also adds another dislikeable 'character' to the system sound...I blame the ferrite cores, perhaps.
Dan.
can't rely on series connecting all winding pairs - you really need electrical coupling of at least one pair of the same V shared paralleled windings between the 2 xfmr to enforce even voltage division across the seriesed windings - since the windings don't share the same core/common flux linkage
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.