Hi and thanks for the explanation
I was thinking to Potentiometers ... and i was curious to know.
Because i have the feeling, after some test, that putting a good attenuator in a decent preamp can help a lot indeed in the sense of increasing transparency. A lot indeed.
Kind regards, gino
Is that HFNRR test LP worth it? I can't get my self to buy anything from ChardasI do have a full set of the RCA's with only a few plays. I have one of those USB microscopes, they've appeared by the dozens at work to set up probe stations.
Yes the HFNRR. Is very good , i would not waste time and work without one, your new VTF required may scare you, the difference after running thru the test tracks makes it very much worthwhile and a neccesity when setting up a TT. The usb microscope will allow better viewing of stylus VTA. If you go whole hog you can use Frieckerts method and there is software that actually tells you the SRA for those who have to know ..
Setting Up A Phono Cartridge | The Absolute Sound
Personally i use micro and camera pics to view the angle , as i then adjust for lowest surface noise and good balance after listening. I had to run lower VTA on my Denon to get it to full out like the grado , ended up with very low surface noise, full body and excellent tracking . The dynamic test on the test record helps in setting up VTF , before fully tackling vta(or Sra) i try not to get carried away on Tracking all of them out with too much VTF , because on regular recordings things will be a bit tame , you have to be intuitive and work within the limits of your TT/arm , get it right and you will PM your Buddies about the virtue of analog over digital and unlike current Boutique prices , good analog doent have to be expensive , way cheaper than good digital , the problem is the **** poor pressings from past , on good pressings it delivers ..
Yep Pita and from an era where even the avg pleb had to have intelligence to survive, not like today with PC and software , so they know everything , so yes i find it fun when I'm in the mood for it ..
Last edited:
dvv,
As you stated there is nothing wrong with a quality paper composition cone loudspeaker. What I was alluding to was just what you picked up on. the paper cones in those 65 cent speakers will be the thinnest, lowest quality paper that can reasonably be used and make sound, there is very little attention paid to any detail except for lowest cost. The voisecoil will have the thinnest wire possible wound on a paper former and the ceramic magnet will be the absolute minimum possible. Basically as I said earlier no better than what came in a 9 transistor radio, yes you can hear sound but it is distorted and very band limited. Don't forget that most of these pc speakers are full range devices, no separate tweeter so no real high frequency response or very ragged at best. I am not saying that you can't make a speaker that has decent sound, decent not great that is small and full range, but not what is in those Harmon desktop pc speakers, not going to happen at that cost point.
Just for fun I listened to those organ tracks put up earlier on my laptop, of course my laptop has sound by Beats, they were obviously well make sound tracks but I have to say I heard no real low frequencies out of my laptop, as I expected! I didn't purchase my laptop because it had sound by Beats, just came with it, it is a joke, I mite as well be listening to a transistor radio! Just what I would expect Frank's speakers to sound like, actually Frank's would sound better, but by how much? What Frank has is something so you have sound, background sound at best though.
As you stated there is nothing wrong with a quality paper composition cone loudspeaker. What I was alluding to was just what you picked up on. the paper cones in those 65 cent speakers will be the thinnest, lowest quality paper that can reasonably be used and make sound, there is very little attention paid to any detail except for lowest cost. The voisecoil will have the thinnest wire possible wound on a paper former and the ceramic magnet will be the absolute minimum possible. Basically as I said earlier no better than what came in a 9 transistor radio, yes you can hear sound but it is distorted and very band limited. Don't forget that most of these pc speakers are full range devices, no separate tweeter so no real high frequency response or very ragged at best. I am not saying that you can't make a speaker that has decent sound, decent not great that is small and full range, but not what is in those Harmon desktop pc speakers, not going to happen at that cost point.
Just for fun I listened to those organ tracks put up earlier on my laptop, of course my laptop has sound by Beats, they were obviously well make sound tracks but I have to say I heard no real low frequencies out of my laptop, as I expected! I didn't purchase my laptop because it had sound by Beats, just came with it, it is a joke, I mite as well be listening to a transistor radio! Just what I would expect Frank's speakers to sound like, actually Frank's would sound better, but by how much? What Frank has is something so you have sound, background sound at best though.
Okay John,
Can you explain why it is impossible to make a quality audio device with integrated circuits that is comparable to your discrete designs? What is it about the IC's that inherently limits the devices in your mind? Is it strictly the freedom that you have to choose every single component or is there something in the current carrying capabilities that makes the integrated circuits impossible to match your discrete devices? I'll let you explain it to us yourself, and then perhaps we can discuss if there are solutions or real limitations to the integrated circuits or just the implementation.
Can you explain why it is impossible to make a quality audio device with integrated circuits that is comparable to your discrete designs? What is it about the IC's that inherently limits the devices in your mind? Is it strictly the freedom that you have to choose every single component or is there something in the current carrying capabilities that makes the integrated circuits impossible to match your discrete devices? I'll let you explain it to us yourself, and then perhaps we can discuss if there are solutions or real limitations to the integrated circuits or just the implementation.
Thank you DVV, for your positive input.
This PDF file was put together by Dimitri,(who contributes here) some years ago, without my knowledge, from what I presume are inputs to internet sites from previous years. Of course, I am dead serious about my opinions and suggestions on how to do the best audio possible, and I have been after it continuously for the last 50 years.
What is interesting is that just this week, an old friend of mine, (the first PhD I ever hired, 40 years ago) rang me up and said that he was studying the same document. He said, to my disappointment, that it was very confusing to read, and that I should write a BOOK instead, and that he would help me. I personally do not find it that confusing to read, but then, I know the material already, but I am gratified that you, DVV, got something out of it. I doubt that I will ever get the energy to write a book, and in this 'climate' I don't see much demand for it, either.
Why people don't think that I am not stating my honest opinion on all audio matters, disappoints me. My only 'weakness'(as I see it) is that I cannot be as critical of my own designs as well as others, because it might effect sales and the marketing people jump on me when I say too much. I am going to look at the Pdf again and see where it sits.
This PDF file was put together by Dimitri,(who contributes here) some years ago, without my knowledge, from what I presume are inputs to internet sites from previous years. Of course, I am dead serious about my opinions and suggestions on how to do the best audio possible, and I have been after it continuously for the last 50 years.
What is interesting is that just this week, an old friend of mine, (the first PhD I ever hired, 40 years ago) rang me up and said that he was studying the same document. He said, to my disappointment, that it was very confusing to read, and that I should write a BOOK instead, and that he would help me. I personally do not find it that confusing to read, but then, I know the material already, but I am gratified that you, DVV, got something out of it. I doubt that I will ever get the energy to write a book, and in this 'climate' I don't see much demand for it, either.
Why people don't think that I am not stating my honest opinion on all audio matters, disappoints me. My only 'weakness'(as I see it) is that I cannot be as critical of my own designs as well as others, because it might effect sales and the marketing people jump on me when I say too much. I am going to look at the Pdf again and see where it sits.
The usual is insufficient operating current, and in the end no one will ever let an ears only shootout happen anyway. There are IC based designs at obscene prices selling to the same type of customers that's about as far as this will get. Different posse all together, I don't know?
Nice to see they are plugging in the Parasound DAC one of my favorite opamps, the LME49990.
For low source resistance noise, it's just pipped by the AD797, while distortion for both is well below 1 ppm.
With an equivalent reflected input source resistance of c. 800 ohms, I'm calculating -110 dBV
For low source resistance noise, it's just pipped by the AD797, while distortion for both is well below 1 ppm.
With an equivalent reflected input source resistance of c. 800 ohms, I'm calculating -110 dBV
My only objection to your text above is your use of the word "reasonably". I can't speak about Aussie Frank's speakers, but those I pulled out of my car were way below any reasonable limit, even for car speakers.
Until I saw them, I had no idea such junk was even made anywhere, even in cost conscious China.
As for Aussie Frank, what I can't get a grip on is that he is obviously well into the matter and appears to be a hard working man, so I can't undertand what's stopping him from making himself a truly reasonable pair of smallish speaker boxes with some decent drivers inside. I understand that this is quite a job, because beside the actual loudspeakers, he would also have to make decent power amps. But then, he could use TWO chip amps per side with an electronic XO, and push the entry level up by several steps, ending up with what might be considered some serious, albeit small, speakers.
And, if he's prepared to sacrifice some efficiency, he can get an unexpectedly good extension downards down to 55 Hz or so, the reduced efficiency being naturally offset by more powerful chip amps and making use of power robbing passive XO.
A friend of mine did that using Morel (Israeli) drivers, and I must admit to being rather surprised at how good, clean and clear they sounded in standard form, i.e. with passive XOs, driven by a vintage Pioneer integrated amp rated at some 80 WRMS or so. Not cheap, overall price works out to around €600 all told (at local inflated prices), but if I was pressed for space and had to have small speakers or no speakers, I'd go for them in a jiffy.
Last edited:
John, you're completely wrong! Judging by your input here your book would be a bestseller! Please do it. I'm dead serious. I already learned a lot from you, for what I'm very grateful.
John, on my life, I meant every word I wrote. I find that I have learnt a few things about you as well, which have simply put some things in better perspective, things I suspected but did not actually know and felt uncomfortable by directly asking you.
Words can be powerful, if taken half-intelligently at a bit more than surface value.
For example, I now understand much better one of your comments to me on another thread - stick to Otala's reasoning. I did, always, as it made good sense tio me, but I now see that what made good sense to me also made sense to a good deal of other people who know much more than I do. That's because your collected texts have provided me with a much better background.
Ultimately, there's this. As you might imagine, as a man of words, I read quite quickly. If there's need for it, I do not shy away from going back and rereading. I was reading your text and in two hours I got to page 18. I realized that the reason for this was simple, I was not just reading, I was trying to integrated what you wrote into my scheme of things. I was giving it a chance to soak in. For the first time in over 20 years, what I have for brains was working full time and still taking up good real time, which obviously means I was integrating thought by thought, piece by pices, like an intellectual puzzle.
That, John, has no price, because it is so painfully rare, and I was subconciously taking my time because I wanted it to last longer. I am still reading it. I'll think it all over (I like to do that) and I'll let you know by PM what I got from it and let you be the judge of what it was for me.
The late and great James Bongiorno always let me do that. His messages were like telegraph messages costing $1k per word, short and straight to the point, but he never ever missed a beat or left me wanting a clearer answer. I am still sad because of his passing on, his ability to share without reserve has greatly endeared him to me.
Anyway, I'm off to read those texts.
Oh look it's fanboy city in here now
Well if all you require is a one sided opinion and not a lot of truth then yes, a book written by JC might be your cup of tea.
So placing a cap and gas discharge device on the Bybee box is JC's claim to fame so he placed his name on the outside? Okaaaaaaaaaaaay That infers that he also believes and endorses all the claims for it.
Well if all you require is a one sided opinion and not a lot of truth then yes, a book written by JC might be your cup of tea.
So placing a cap and gas discharge device on the Bybee box is JC's claim to fame so he placed his name on the outside? Okaaaaaaaaaaaay
That infers that he also believes and endorses all the claims for it.
How about Linear Audio publishing your book? I bet Jan would jump at the chance.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.