I meant to get Ostripper to write up the guide himself. I've already asked him about it in the thread.
I agree about templates.
It would be nice if we could insert a flash schematic maker, so you could enter in your schematic while you edit your page. Then a person later on could take that same schematic, and instantly put in their mod or improvement. This way all the schematics would look the same, and it would look professional. Of course I'm dreaming. (EDIT: maybe not, it could just be a paint program with snap-to-grid, and symbols could be drawn that way. Surely there is an open source flash program like this)
- keantoken
I agree about templates.
It would be nice if we could insert a flash schematic maker, so you could enter in your schematic while you edit your page. Then a person later on could take that same schematic, and instantly put in their mod or improvement. This way all the schematics would look the same, and it would look professional. Of course I'm dreaming. (EDIT: maybe not, it could just be a paint program with snap-to-grid, and symbols could be drawn that way. Surely there is an open source flash program like this)
- keantoken
Last edited:
Awesome! Then I'll look at creating some templates.
That would be really cool but I think we should focus on doing what we can with what we've got right now. I don't know what the admins would be willing to spend their time one implementing. And to date, the wiki really hasn't seen a lot of wide spread use. Were I them, I'd want some clear evidence that it was going to work out before I dedicated any extra effort on it.
Cheers,
Dave.
Can someone please review [wiki=Template:AmplifierProject]%[/wiki] and adjust it to show the things that are necessary?
I've taken a first crack at an amplifier template. Please have a look at it and adjust it as you see fit. I am, by no means, qualified to judge what people are going to look for in a typical amplifier page.
The one goal that I think we should work towards, though, is brevity.
As for the section on specifications, I just listed the kinds of things in that I would look for in buying an amp. Whether the amplifier crowd, here, actually looks at those things, I've no idea.
I've taken a first crack at an amplifier template. Please have a look at it and adjust it as you see fit. I am, by no means, qualified to judge what people are going to look for in a typical amplifier page.
The one goal that I think we should work towards, though, is brevity.
As for the section on specifications, I just listed the kinds of things in that I would look for in buying an amp. Whether the amplifier crowd, here, actually looks at those things, I've no idea.
No one would spend time on making a schematic maker if there didn't seem to be any interest in the wiki.
Ostripper's project seems to essentially be a set of modular amp boards. A PSU board, multiple frontend modules and multiple output stage modules. The amps are designed to be of modern quality, with modern components. Nothing incredibly fancy, only tried and true methods reasonably guaranteed to not give trouble. The original Mongrel was intended to be a remake of Symasym, which is a popular DIY amp. Ostripper wanted to preserve the sonics of the original, but increase the power and ruggedness. This specific module is called the "supersym" I believe. He has modules for an AKSA type amp, Doug Self Blameless, one with an experimental VAS, and I think there are others he's working on he hasn't talked about yet.
- keantoken
Ostripper's project seems to essentially be a set of modular amp boards. A PSU board, multiple frontend modules and multiple output stage modules. The amps are designed to be of modern quality, with modern components. Nothing incredibly fancy, only tried and true methods reasonably guaranteed to not give trouble. The original Mongrel was intended to be a remake of Symasym, which is a popular DIY amp. Ostripper wanted to preserve the sonics of the original, but increase the power and ruggedness. This specific module is called the "supersym" I believe. He has modules for an AKSA type amp, Doug Self Blameless, one with an experimental VAS, and I think there are others he's working on he hasn't talked about yet.
- keantoken
Ah, so he's going to need several pages the capture the design of each of the components? Ah, then he'd be better off to make a 'book' (ie - a bunch of related pages, like you've done with LTSpice).
Some amps have extensive mods - you may want to add a link structure in the Mods section so all the mods can be documented separately.
He could probably make a Mongrel page which decribes the project and then link to a bunch of templates for each of the modules.
I added a few things to the amplifier templates specifications.
- keantoken
He could probably make a Mongrel page which decribes the project and then link to a bunch of templates for each of the modules.
I added a few things to the amplifier templates specifications.
- keantoken
Perhaps we should separate the amp section between tubes and solid state? I was thinking that the amplifier template would also work for power regulator and power supplies, but then I realized that regulators for both tubes and SS thrown into the same pot might be messy. Generally you know whether you're looking for a tube or SS amp, and the type of reg for each, so throwing them together would be inconvenient.
Here is what I think we should do:
Audio Electronics
- keantoken
Here is what I think we should do:
Audio Electronics
- Projects:
- Tube
- Amplifiers
- Regulators
- Series
- Shunt
- Exotic
- Solid State
- Amplifiers
- Conventional
- No Feedback
- No Global Negative Feedback
- Regulators
- Series
- Shunt
- Switching
- Exotic (feedforward, negative impedance...)
- Amplifiers
Last edited:
Dude, this is your expertise, not mine. I'm just the secretary. 🙂
I do? 🙂
Cool Beans. Question though, can you not use the same regulator for an SS and Tube amp? If there are cases where that will be the case, you might want to keep them in one category and just add a property at the top of the regulator page to identify what you should use it with. Otherwise, I agree that keeping the separate makes perfect sense.
For starters, how about we create a single projects page that is laid out exactly as you have above. Then, when the time comes to expand out, we can create sub-pages for the different classes?
Tube circuits need a much higher voltage supply than solid state. These voltages would destroy most SS circuits. Likewise, tube circuits won't operate at the low voltages used by SS. Since they have different needs, different regulators are used. Some regs may be adapted for either, but using one for both without modifying is asking for trouble. Usually these regs will have a "tube version" and "SS version".
Tube circuits use high voltage, low current. Solid state uses low voltage, high current. This is the main reason we use different supplies for each. Tube regs can use SS circuitry or tube circuitry. I don't see any benefit from having a tube in an SS power supply.
I should probably add categories for preamps, phono amps, power amps... I knew I was forgetting something.
I may make a separate regulator section like you say, I'm still trying to find an intuitive way to categorize all this.
- keantoken
Tube circuits use high voltage, low current. Solid state uses low voltage, high current. This is the main reason we use different supplies for each. Tube regs can use SS circuitry or tube circuitry. I don't see any benefit from having a tube in an SS power supply.
I should probably add categories for preamps, phono amps, power amps... I knew I was forgetting something.
I may make a separate regulator section like you say, I'm still trying to find an intuitive way to categorize all this.
- keantoken
This sounds like a wiki article to me. 🙂
And who says that asking an ignorant question never comes to any good? 🙂
Yeah, this was the reason that I'd originally thought of just having an electronics section and then separate the different types of circuits into different categories (amplification stage, power, etc). Part of the reason for that was because, at the beginning, we will (as you said earlier) not have a lot of content.
As we fill the content out (and as the requirements for the different categories become more clear) we can simply change the index pages that they live on. But from day one, I see all of these projects living on the same index page separated by some L2 headers.
In software, we have a saying, "You will never know less than you do right now; by procrastinating on making architectural decisions you are able to make the most informed decision possible when it's forced upon you."
Question: What namespaces do you see for the different wiki pages? (Name spaces are how you group concepts within pages). For example, in Template:AmplifierProject, the word Template is the name space.
I am thinking:
In my head, I'm aligning the technical name spaces along the different types of projects. Does that work or can you think of something that's more intuitive or less architecturally limiting?
I am thinking:
- Amplifier:
- Regulator:
- LoudSpeaker:
- Template:
- Help:
- HowTo:
- GroupBuy:
In my head, I'm aligning the technical name spaces along the different types of projects. Does that work or can you think of something that's more intuitive or less architecturally limiting?
There will probably be a section on getting the most out of rectifiers and transformers without resorting to regulation. Aside from that, it may not be any use to categorize miscellaneous components, unless people start seriously contributing.
There is a long list of DIY amplifiers, it will probably take up its own page, rather than the main one. However I concur on your vision of most of the content being linked to from the main page for the moment.
I am fine with categorizing the pages with a namespace prefix, but it wouldn't score high on the cosmetic scale if all the links looked like that.
- keantoken
There is a long list of DIY amplifiers, it will probably take up its own page, rather than the main one. However I concur on your vision of most of the content being linked to from the main page for the moment.
I am fine with categorizing the pages with a namespace prefix, but it wouldn't score high on the cosmetic scale if all the links looked like that.
- keantoken
Also, I've created [wiki=Template:SpeakerProject]%[/wiki]
I'd like some feedback on that one from the speaker guys. Does it have the things that people want to see from speaker projects? What's missing and what's not necessary.
Cheers,
Dave.
I'd like some feedback on that one from the speaker guys. Does it have the things that people want to see from speaker projects? What's missing and what's not necessary.
Cheers,
Dave.
I've created a new [wiki=WikiEditingGuide]Wiki Editing Guide[/wiki]; feedback please.
Note: The editing guide has links to a bunch of pages that don't exist yet. If you are feeling bored, please feel free to create one or more. 🙂
Note: The editing guide has links to a bunch of pages that don't exist yet. If you are feeling bored, please feel free to create one or more. 🙂
Hi Guys,
I've implemented the front page mods as described in WikiStructure. The front page is pretty huge right now and it's kind of devoid of any *real* content, but I've pre-created the wiki page links in the front page for volunteers to fill stuff in.
Cheers,
Dave.
I've implemented the front page mods as described in WikiStructure. The front page is pretty huge right now and it's kind of devoid of any *real* content, but I've pre-created the wiki page links in the front page for volunteers to fill stuff in.
Cheers,
Dave.
Will this just be a single article then? If so, under what section of the new front page should it go?
PS - If I ignore the 'Old Pages' section of the front page, I think the wiki already looks a lot more impressive... despite the fact that it's completely devoid of any real content. 🙂 I hope you don't disagree.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.