The answer to that is a secret, but if you read the
the very first two lines of JC's post it may be revealed to you - 🙄🙄
No, it was designed in the early 70's at Phillips Research by Matti Otala and Jan Lostroh. There is an AES paper describing it completely. The amp was copied by Electrocompaniet in Norway, and is usually called the 'Otala' amp. It was a revolution in amp design.
Last edited:
I recall hearing that when Hafler? was sold/sent to a outside assembly service the product nearly died because they couldn't get the service's buyers to quit substituting part manu based on nominal specs and production people refusing to match critical semis
even "conventional engineers" can understand this John - try telling us something new
I think many would welcome some modern advances in Audio circuit info - just drop the rehasing of 30 year old stuff - especially espousing reasons that have been thoroughly debunked on technical grounds
even "conventional engineers" can understand this John - try telling us something new
I think many would welcome some modern advances in Audio circuit info - just drop the rehasing of 30 year old stuff - especially espousing reasons that have been thoroughly debunked on technical grounds
Well said John; it's up to us to do things the right way. Only us can make our own life and the ones of our friends more appetizing.
The Hafler that Erno Borbely designed occured about 1 decade after the 'Otala' amp was designed. Before that, there was no contest with the 'Otala' or the JC-3 that was designed a year or so later. Both of these amps had 100V/uS slew rate. This was a primary breakthrough in amp design. People who care should look up the paper.
One of the crucial aspects of audio, that is obviously still poorly comprehended, is that everyday parts in components can still lead to sound that is as impressive as anything that you've ever heard - the mindless chasing after spectacularly expensive, and relatively incompetent, components says it all - this whole game has a long way to go still, without requiring a single new "discovery" to be made.
After I quite by chance stumbled across the key ingredients to getting convincing sound, I could do nothing but shake my head at the hopeless quality of much of what I listened to subsequently, irrespective of cost. "Can I be the only person who gets it, this is ridiculous?!", I thought ...
So, it's certainly worth keeping the conversation going; just from the simple process of repetition a little more light may filter into some 'dark' places, and a touch more progress is made ... 😉
After I quite by chance stumbled across the key ingredients to getting convincing sound, I could do nothing but shake my head at the hopeless quality of much of what I listened to subsequently, irrespective of cost. "Can I be the only person who gets it, this is ridiculous?!", I thought ...
So, it's certainly worth keeping the conversation going; just from the simple process of repetition a little more light may filter into some 'dark' places, and a touch more progress is made ... 😉
Just came across this new thread, www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/256824-single-full-range-driver-convert-born.html. Beautifully captures the almost shock one gets when a system snaps into focus, balanced by the casual disregard by others of that experience being of significance; the essence of system refinement is never losing that "snapping into focus" quality while improving around the edges, in other attributes. If that approach is not used, then often what will evolve will be a bombastic dog of a system that will technically impress, but subjectively bomb ...
John, you could had two mono setups; one in your living room, and the other in your garage; with that stereo preamp. ...Multiroom preamp.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.