No need to go wirewound- this part will work the same as the fraud part:
LOB1R030J IRC / TT electronics | Mouser
LOB1R030J IRC / TT electronics | Mouser
Frank, I know most of the guys here think you're a nutter - but I have to agree with the above statements, as you've described the phenomenon well. I know how hard it is to believe, unless you've heard it. I didn't even imagine it to be possible until I heard it. Once you have heard it, it becomes clear. It's amazing what can be done, if done right - tho it can still be hard to wrap your head around. In my experience, the first category is what works the best. Recordings that have been seriously overworked (2nd category) can be nigh impossible to disentangle.
Reply to #97- picking up some connectors at local electronic parts supplier on weekend- discussed bullet plugs and "eddy currents" with proprietor/physics student. Most went way over my head, but gist was that a lot of Maxwell's em equations look similar to those found in fluid dynamic equations. Maybe shape can alter a conductor's effect on an electron stream? "Everything is everything" Hathaway.
For the record, I have no contractual obligations to Jack Bybee.
However, we did meet up, (the first time in months), and my associate and I then went to his house to listen to his system. The last and only other time that I did this was more than 10 years ago. He wanted me to listen to some things that he found, so I went there for a few hours.
One thing that surprised me greatly was an added Bybee device that sort of looks like a normal high power Bybee, but works better for very low level signals.
For phono input, he used a Vendetta phono stage with a CTC Blowtorch line stage.
He first played a good vinyl recording without this Bybee device added. Then he added the Bybee device DIRECTLY to the input of the Vendetta Research phono (10 ohms equivalent noise), and while PLAYING the record, the noise was substantially reduced. He apparently was removing noise coming from the record itself! I was very surprised.
Now I have a pair of these devices that I want to experiment with, and most probably add to my phono front end, if they work the way that I heard them behave at Jack's.
However, we did meet up, (the first time in months), and my associate and I then went to his house to listen to his system. The last and only other time that I did this was more than 10 years ago. He wanted me to listen to some things that he found, so I went there for a few hours.
One thing that surprised me greatly was an added Bybee device that sort of looks like a normal high power Bybee, but works better for very low level signals.
For phono input, he used a Vendetta phono stage with a CTC Blowtorch line stage.
He first played a good vinyl recording without this Bybee device added. Then he added the Bybee device DIRECTLY to the input of the Vendetta Research phono (10 ohms equivalent noise), and while PLAYING the record, the noise was substantially reduced. He apparently was removing noise coming from the record itself! I was very surprised.
Now I have a pair of these devices that I want to experiment with, and most probably add to my phono front end, if they work the way that I heard them behave at Jack's.
*As an example of the first, the recordings of Robert Johnson are about as muddy, and buried in noise and detritus as can be. However, as the system improves all the debris unrelated to what happened in front of the microsphone starts to shift into another acoustic space, it can be perceived as something that's incidental to the sense of the musician, a real person, performing in front of you.*
Yes; it's called 'focussing'. People do it all the time, in music listening, squinting to see something far away, re-reading difficult passages in a book. Everything outside the spere of focussing seems to drop away and drift, ehh, out of focus.
jan
Yes; it's called 'focussing'. People do it all the time, in music listening, squinting to see something far away, re-reading difficult passages in a book. Everything outside the spere of focussing seems to drop away and drift, ehh, out of focus.
jan
Oh, well that's completely different, then. 😀 The little ripoff gizmo I have isn't anything close to 25W. No matter if it were, at 30 milli-ohm, it's going to be pretty tough to dissipate a watt, much less 25 watts. About 6 amps per watt. Ohm's Law, unless you're claiming that he's overcome that as well as the Second Law of thermodynamics. Perhaps the 25W resistor will make execution by Old Sparky a more pleasant process for the prisoners?
Ahhh! - don't I know it ... ah, well - life goes on ... 😉
The really good news is that the second category can be "solved" - it's no more than an extension of what needs to be done for the first, just that even more effort and refinement needs to be applied. I have a range of tracks which effectively allow me to grade where a system is at, at any particular stage of tweaking: some tracks will get a pass, others, more difficult to untangle, will fail.
The pop recordings are difficult, because there is so much detail within, which has been mangled to a fair degree by passing through too much circuitry before hitting the presses. However, they do come good, and they are immensely satisfying when this happens - the detail creates a tremendously rich soundscape, there is so much going on, and it's easy to focus in on any particular element, to become aware of that in the context of the overall sound. This is very similar to, say, listening to an orchestra live: there is an intense overarching sound, texture in the air from the composition and arrangement, but at any point you can shift your attention to a particular instrument in the 'pack' and quite easily follow and appreciate the contribution of that one aspect, or instrument to the piece.
So, yes, focussing is the key - as Jan states - but the essential requirement is that it is 'easy' to do that, that you can do it in a relaxed, nonchalant way, without conscious effort. As soon as it becomes a fatiguing exercise then you're back to conventional, hifi, reproduction ...
Last edited:
OF COURSE NOT, SY. The part that you evaluated is a completely different design. LOOK at the Pacific 0.025 ohm resistor in the picture put here previously.
I predict that that 'little ripoff gizmo' that you evaluated would shock you, IF you had opened it and tried to find the 'resistor', you know, the one that costs under $1.00. '-)
I predict that that 'little ripoff gizmo' that you evaluated would shock you, IF you had opened it and tried to find the 'resistor', you know, the one that costs under $1.00. '-)
Reply to# 59- if that shunt cap follows the resistor's inductance in the circuit, is that not a simple rf filter? And if so, would it not inhibit rf from accumulating in one's system? Seems to me I read somewhere that rf can blow right through power supply caps and cause a lot of mischief if left unfiltered.
How about the shell being coated with a pn junction, whether inside diameter, outside diameter or in between. Is it that?
Well of course it would be shocking to open up a $2k turd and find the equivalent of a straight piece of wire.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.