John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
All too often on this forum people are asked what kind of music they mostly listen to before advice is given on suitable amp, speakers etc. Does the question ever have any relevance?

More relevance than perhaps it should. It is assumed that Metalheads won't want 5W SETs and jazz fans won't want 500W SS welding sets. But whilst the stereotypes of certain topologies being good for certain music types remain those who are convinced that two wrongs make synergy will continue to both ask these questions and answer them.

Also if you are able to answer questions about Max SPL and crest factor you don't actually need to ask the question about what you need :)
 
All too often on this forum people are asked what kind of music they mostly listen to before advice is given on suitable amp, speakers etc. Does the question ever have any relevance?

Yes.

It would be nice if it didn't, but the reality is budgets are constraints and you may be picking and choosing some features.

I think a good stereo doesn't care what is played. How much does that cost? That's the why.
 
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Interesting comment about Neve. As far as I am aware he was making a 'creation' device AKA a musical instrument. As such he needed a 'nice' sound. This is a long way from 'Hi-Fi' which is about accurate reproduction. I want my amplifiers to have no sound at all.

I'm not really sure he would agree at all with that assessment, the Neve consoles were actually known for good, solid, conventional engineering, and lots and lots of op-amps (5532 and 5534 if memory serves) in the early ones. (Nothing boutique in the parts used or the design IMVLE) Most mainstream studio gear was not deliberately interpretative, there were and are lots of effects devices that can be introduced into the recording chain as needed, but the basics were, well basic.. :)
 
So many arguments here center around the concept that ones senses can be fooled.
Yes sure they can, but not completely, and not all of the time, and not of all peoples.
By self repetition of AB experiments one can/will learn to lose all notions of expectation bias and get on with the job of sensibly differentiating A and B....the ultimate differentiation and preference may not be immediate and require longer term listening to discern (minor) objectionable faults and strengths.

Dan.

Thanks Dan, that is an almost perfect representation of self delusion.
 
PMA, I ordered Dostal's book. I feel a kinship with him as a designer. I hope I can learn something useful from him, I am sure that I can. Of course it is quite expensive, but most good books are.

I hope you will find it useful. Of course you will know a lot of what is written in the book, however it might be still useful regarding some consequences etc.

I only have Czech original, first edition, issued 1981. I appreciate that it covers both theory and practical circuit examples, together with measuring methods.
 

Attachments

  • P1020439-1.JPG
    P1020439-1.JPG
    387.2 KB · Views: 220
AX tech editor
Joined 2002
Paid Member
The man who has done a lot in that hybrid circuit design was Jiri Dostal, maybe you know his book on Operational Amplifiers

Operational Amplifiers, Second Edition (EDN Series for Design Engineers): Jiri Dostal: 9780750693172: Amazon.com: Books

Operational Amplifiers by Jiri Dostal

Dostal's book was probably the first one I ever bought on opamps. Bought it in LA, at the Opamp Technical Book store on N Sycamore. Funny how you remember these first discoveries. I was soo young, soo unspoiled ;-)

Jan
 
All too often on this forum people are asked what kind of music they mostly listen to before advice is given on suitable amp, speakers etc. Does the question ever have any relevance?

Good question.

Let´s start with some premises:
-) we know that what we record is only a quite "lossy version" of reality
-) we know that the production of the final record takes places at quite arbitrarily different locations
-) we know that the reproduction of the final record is usually done within a compromised environment
-) we know that during playback the perception by humans is strongly dependent on a lot of cues that enable listeners brain to fill in a lot of the missing parts to give a reasonable illusion of reality. And we know that this human "ability" depends on a lot of individual variables.

Imo it is a quite questionable assertion that within this - obviously quite distorted version of reality - only one correct reproduction exists that suits all individuals.

Given the different compromises (at least at the reproduction at home) the question is of relevance because reproduction of let´s say german chamber music demands other strenghts than reproduction of drum sets (if a sense of realism is needed).
 
Imo it is a quite questionable assertion that within this - obviously quite distorted version of reality - only one correct reproduction exists that suits all individuals.

IMO, it is quite simple. Speaking about electrical path, you have two choices:

1) to amplify the source data with maximum precision as an electric signal and as such send it to speakers with minimum of changes except for requested gain,
2) to modify electric signal to meet YOUR personal taste, then you should be fair enough to admit that you prefer some signal manipulation, including nonlinear distortion.

It is a free choice of anyone to make a choice of (1) or (2) or in between, but then please let's admit that fact.
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
I'm not really sure he would agree at all with that assessment, the Neve consoles were actually known for good, solid, conventional engineering, and lots and lots of op-amps (5532 and 5534 if memory serves) in the early ones. (Nothing boutique in the parts used or the design IMVLE) Most mainstream studio gear was not deliberately interpretative, there were and are lots of effects devices that can be introduced into the recording chain as needed, but the basics were, well basic.. :)

And yet Dave Grohl loved how the Neve made
And what you get when you record on a Neve desk is this really big, warm representation of whatever comes into it. What's going to come out the other end is this bigger, better version of you. And so it makes you sound real, but it makes you sound really good.
that he not only bought one but made a film about it. Now it 'could' be that a certain section of the studio sound believe more in woo and foo than audiophools, but I've never read a comment on the classic Neve consoles saying that they are transparent

What makes these earlier ‘classic’ Neves so special?

Firstly, the sound was fuller, better defined and more ‘audiophile’ than later desks. The construction was (by and large) discrete – individual transistors and components rather than ICs (integrated circuits). Discrete construction reduces current loss, thereby retaining more of the true signal (a simplification, I know).


I have no idea what 'more audiophile' means!


Could be wrong. Never seen or used one. Grohl could be blowing smoke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.