I could subscribe this statement, Thorsten!
And as we see in this thread, it is always worth to listen to the result!
Actually, I try to optimize my mini gainclone and have my "standard" valve buffered GC for comparison (and good tube amps).
As I cannot do measurements like Joseph K., I just can try and listen.
Back to my mini gainclone:
I am using a detached psu, low noise fred diodes, 2x10'000 Jamicon, 2x1'000 Elna, 2x470uF Panasonic FC and 2x0.1uF MKP in the psu.
1 feet cable to the amp, 3x0.8mm litz wire.
Inside the amp 2x1000uF Panasonic FC (yes, CarlosFM: I will try lower values, as I could use some space within this amp for better coupling caps), bridged with 0.1uF multilayer ceramics at the pins.
No snubber, up to now.
The sound was not satisfying. I just removed the multilayer ceramics and the sound is ways better, but a power on click appeared.
Would it be an idea, to try the snubber direct at the chips pin, in this configuration?
Franz
Franz, multilayer ceramics are absolutely inconvenient for audio using, 'cos they are very microphonic.
Normally I never use this multilayer ceramics, but I thought, for bypassing in a small space they could be suitable. And in the datasheet they write about ceramics to!
I will never use them 😀
Franz
I will never use them 😀
Franz
Kuei Yang Wang said:
Not to overly quible. But you don't really know at that point. You only have a level of confidence based on sample size that the result is valid. With a large enough sample size you can have a high confidence but there is still a chance that the results were from random chance.
Franz G said:
Franz, save the precious space on your small amp, just use the small caps there.
100uf is fine.
Use the snubber on the PSU, after the last caps.
Btw, I have a very small LM1875 amp on my bench.
Inverting t-network, OPA2132 input stage.
External PSU, snubbed.😎
carlosfm said:
I have seen DAC listening tests that support what you say. I have seen cable tests that don't fit your statement.
moving_electron said:
With the same listeners?
In a room with 20 there is usually no more than one or two experienced listeners.
When these point out the differences, the others say... "aaaahhh, that's true!!!". And it becomes bloody obvious.😀
So... statistically there is no difference.
See what I mean?
PS: I testified this on many occasions. Actually, it always happens.
Konnichiwa,
No, you do not really know.
I tend to use poor long suffering wife for blind testing. Yesterday she again illustrated to me her value as test subject. Her technical knowledge about audio/electronics is ZIP (she is very cute though). Due to her background (from Liberia in west africa) she is much less conditioned to the sound of electronic music and very much in tune with real music.
And she could not give a flying french coitus what I am rumaging around in the system. Yesterday she was watching her favourite Indian Movies and I needed to pull a pair of 6SN7's from the Amp's (as I needed them as my "bogey reference" set for a newly modded Amp - I use the same Tube set to measure the Amp's behave as I want them to).
They got replaced by some recently aquired highly prestigeous (and expensive) ones I needed to test anyway, so I figured a little burn in as sound system to Kareena Kapur and Shahrukh Khan will be just what the Doctor ordered....
Power the system back up and let the movie play on, I thought I heard a rather disproportinate difference in sound (to the better I thought) but brushed it off as possible self deception, no controls etc...
Before I could skulk off to my bench she asks me what I had done, so I ask why and she explains to me what she feels sounds different. These where the same differences as I felt I had heard almost to a "T".
Now the real fun. I decided afterwards to google what other people felt about these Valves, compared to more generic choices. Guess what, these description largely match again what we both observed. Is any of this relevant?
Well, I knew how much these Tung Sol 6SN7 did cost, so I might if not conciously then unconciously expected a big improvement and might have heard it (actually, I was rather sceptical myself). Equally, I was quite convinced my circuit should large swamp out the differences between Valves so I might have been likely to hear no difference.
Blind or not, my judgement may not have been trustworthy, as I might actually have had an emotional involvement in the outcome, one way or the other. In fact, had I tried to critically listen I might well have found the "overpriced Tung Sol 6SN7" to make a barely noticable improvement in my circuit (as I am such a great hot-shot designer anyway), because that would have been my expectation.
Often our senses will edit for us so that what we expect to happen happens, according to our senses. Hence my point about "uninterested" but good listeners. I do try to keep my mind as open as possible and try to audition as fair as I can, but independent confirmation is always good.
She did not (and does not) know how expensive these valves are (in fact, she does not even realise they are rare and expensive, they are just some more of these funny lamps). She did not even that what I changed should change the sound. Still she heard the difference and was able to qualify and quantify it. To me this is reasonably conclusive, even though merely anecdotal.
Some time soon when she is not looking but has toroughly familiarised herself with the system I will swap my "reference" valves back in and see if she complains about how I "have now ruined the sound of the system, put it back!".... If that happens too then we have a rather informal, but fairly conclusive blind test, despite very poor statistical usability.
In fact, I am not even sure we can use statistics to give an indication of the likelyhood of us both noticing the same change in sound and it concurring largely with other peoples observations if there was no difference in reality and equally the of the probability to the other.
So, as all other things, statistics are merely a tool and not the only valid one.
Sayonara
moving_electron said:
No, you do not really know.
I tend to use poor long suffering wife for blind testing. Yesterday she again illustrated to me her value as test subject. Her technical knowledge about audio/electronics is ZIP (she is very cute though). Due to her background (from Liberia in west africa) she is much less conditioned to the sound of electronic music and very much in tune with real music.
And she could not give a flying french coitus what I am rumaging around in the system. Yesterday she was watching her favourite Indian Movies and I needed to pull a pair of 6SN7's from the Amp's (as I needed them as my "bogey reference" set for a newly modded Amp - I use the same Tube set to measure the Amp's behave as I want them to).
They got replaced by some recently aquired highly prestigeous (and expensive) ones I needed to test anyway, so I figured a little burn in as sound system to Kareena Kapur and Shahrukh Khan will be just what the Doctor ordered....
Power the system back up and let the movie play on, I thought I heard a rather disproportinate difference in sound (to the better I thought) but brushed it off as possible self deception, no controls etc...
Before I could skulk off to my bench she asks me what I had done, so I ask why and she explains to me what she feels sounds different. These where the same differences as I felt I had heard almost to a "T".
Now the real fun. I decided afterwards to google what other people felt about these Valves, compared to more generic choices. Guess what, these description largely match again what we both observed. Is any of this relevant?
Well, I knew how much these Tung Sol 6SN7 did cost, so I might if not conciously then unconciously expected a big improvement and might have heard it (actually, I was rather sceptical myself). Equally, I was quite convinced my circuit should large swamp out the differences between Valves so I might have been likely to hear no difference.
Blind or not, my judgement may not have been trustworthy, as I might actually have had an emotional involvement in the outcome, one way or the other. In fact, had I tried to critically listen I might well have found the "overpriced Tung Sol 6SN7" to make a barely noticable improvement in my circuit (as I am such a great hot-shot designer anyway), because that would have been my expectation.
Often our senses will edit for us so that what we expect to happen happens, according to our senses. Hence my point about "uninterested" but good listeners. I do try to keep my mind as open as possible and try to audition as fair as I can, but independent confirmation is always good.
She did not (and does not) know how expensive these valves are (in fact, she does not even realise they are rare and expensive, they are just some more of these funny lamps). She did not even that what I changed should change the sound. Still she heard the difference and was able to qualify and quantify it. To me this is reasonably conclusive, even though merely anecdotal.
Some time soon when she is not looking but has toroughly familiarised herself with the system I will swap my "reference" valves back in and see if she complains about how I "have now ruined the sound of the system, put it back!".... If that happens too then we have a rather informal, but fairly conclusive blind test, despite very poor statistical usability.
In fact, I am not even sure we can use statistics to give an indication of the likelyhood of us both noticing the same change in sound and it concurring largely with other peoples observations if there was no difference in reality and equally the of the probability to the other.
So, as all other things, statistics are merely a tool and not the only valid one.
Sayonara
hey guys!
I want to let you know that a blind test allready has been conducted.
My friend is a car mechanics student, but has a good ear on audio, though not really into diy'ing audio.
he has however been around to listen to my amp. at first we were both halfway happy with the sound, nothing more. in fact i was a litle dissapointed with the sound, but this feeling i cept to myself. (mostly..)
after i changed the PS caps to 6800uf's he told me the amp sounded like ****, and i agreed with him.
the next week he came over again, this time i had the snubber on.
he distictly pointed out the very obvious difference, quite impressed with what 2 resisitors and 4 caps could do with the sound, allthough he didn't the amp had been improved.
(I'l just add that the caps are no-names who has resided inside a grundig amp at school. i coud have them if i wanted, offcource i did..)
not the most convincing tale, but it's what makes me certain i'm not daft and crazy. i have altso gotten comments on greate sound after putting on the snubber by people who just shrugged their heads before.
steenoe can probably tell you the same.
my two cents
marius
I want to let you know that a blind test allready has been conducted.
My friend is a car mechanics student, but has a good ear on audio, though not really into diy'ing audio.
he has however been around to listen to my amp. at first we were both halfway happy with the sound, nothing more. in fact i was a litle dissapointed with the sound, but this feeling i cept to myself. (mostly..)
after i changed the PS caps to 6800uf's he told me the amp sounded like ****, and i agreed with him.
the next week he came over again, this time i had the snubber on.
he distictly pointed out the very obvious difference, quite impressed with what 2 resisitors and 4 caps could do with the sound, allthough he didn't the amp had been improved.
(I'l just add that the caps are no-names who has resided inside a grundig amp at school. i coud have them if i wanted, offcource i did..)
not the most convincing tale, but it's what makes me certain i'm not daft and crazy. i have altso gotten comments on greate sound after putting on the snubber by people who just shrugged their heads before.
steenoe can probably tell you the same.
my two cents
marius
carlosfm said:
No. They were different people for the DAC test and for the cables.
There are two tests that stick in my mind. The first was a cable test where the listeners recorded their comments and compared notes later. The results for each indiviual was different when they knew the brand/cost of the cable vs. when they did the test blind. It was not clear the level of competence, but they were folks that seemed to care about listening carefully and making recommendations.
In a similar DAC test (with other people) though the results of the sighted and blind were the pretty much the same.
Not only the listeners have their role, but also who conducts a blind test has to know what to do so that the end results have some reliability.
It very often fails here.🙄
More on that later, it there's interest.
It very often fails here.🙄
More on that later, it there's interest.
Konnichiwa,
A plea for sanity. There has been so much ABX testing discussion and controversy in the last 25 Years, I for one cannot take another round.
Any number of people have illustrated many potential shortcomings in conducting ABX and similar ouble blind tests. Various test setups have been seriously criticised and shown to have been not partiuculary conductive to allowing small changes to be heard.
The attitude and approaches by ABX Proponents have more often than not illustrated a severe prejudice towards using ABX/DB Testing to "debunk" what they consider "bunk". Yet any reasonable criticism about methodology, statistical analysis methodology, actual individual experimental conditions is brushed away and claims are regulary repeated that only ABX/DB testing results in anything significant and the results of earlier tests are claimed to be valid and to support the inaudibility of much controversial issues.
This has been discussed, debated, flamed, argued about to the point of severe Drain Bamage, throwing up, acute nausea without any resolution.
No more please. MERCY.
Sayonara
carlosfm said:
A plea for sanity. There has been so much ABX testing discussion and controversy in the last 25 Years, I for one cannot take another round.
Any number of people have illustrated many potential shortcomings in conducting ABX and similar ouble blind tests. Various test setups have been seriously criticised and shown to have been not partiuculary conductive to allowing small changes to be heard.
The attitude and approaches by ABX Proponents have more often than not illustrated a severe prejudice towards using ABX/DB Testing to "debunk" what they consider "bunk". Yet any reasonable criticism about methodology, statistical analysis methodology, actual individual experimental conditions is brushed away and claims are regulary repeated that only ABX/DB testing results in anything significant and the results of earlier tests are claimed to be valid and to support the inaudibility of much controversial issues.
This has been discussed, debated, flamed, argued about to the point of severe Drain Bamage, throwing up, acute nausea without any resolution.
No more please. MERCY.
Sayonara
carlosfm said:
Carlos,
Would you do us a favor? Read page 10 of this document:
http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/AudioScience.pdf ,
the section titled:
"Blind versus Sighted Tests - Seeing is believing".
It is less than one page, takes very little time. Then let us know what you think of that.
Jan Didden
janneman said:
Jan, this is nothing new:
"When you know what you are listening to, there is a chance that your opinions might not be completely unbiased."
It is what happens generically with most listeners.
I've passed this phase many years ago.
But I can tell you that with a well conducted sighted test this doesn't happen with most listeners.
And to me, when testing my things, you can be sure it doesn't happen.
Why would I be biased to use 1R+100nf for the snubber?
Because I have these values in my parts box?
I had others too...
And I would prefer not to use more parts. If the snubber wasn't needed, I wouldn't use it. But the amp sounded bad with high capacitance.
Seriously, it is puzzling to see you always with the same story as if I was listening to boomboxes until yesterday.
You have taken this thread off-topic, we have discussed these matters on another thread, where I shared my experience.
Right now, I completely agree with Kuei:
Kuei Yang Wang said:
These discussions about blind and sighted tests always tend to cause too much theorectical allucinations.
Better drink a beer.
carlosfm said:
Well, there are people who have REALLY tested this, and they don't agree. Not that it will make a difference to you, of course.
I give up.
Jan Didden
Edit: This is from AES preprint # 3894, 1994, in case anybody wonders.
A question to skilled designers (I'm sorry if I forgot somebody)
Mr. Carr, Mr. Pass, Mr. DiGiacomo, Mr. Dean, Mr. Elliot, Mr. Holton, Mr. Clausen, Mr. Curl, Mr. Boström, Mr Dieckmann, Mr. Loesch, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Daniel and many more, do you use "snubbed" power supplies? If yes, why? If no, why not?
Mr. Carr, Mr. Pass, Mr. DiGiacomo, Mr. Dean, Mr. Elliot, Mr. Holton, Mr. Clausen, Mr. Curl, Mr. Boström, Mr Dieckmann, Mr. Loesch, Mr. Andersen, Mr. Daniel and many more, do you use "snubbed" power supplies? If yes, why? If no, why not?
peranders said:
Ah!
You kicked Phred out of this forum, do you expect him to register again just to answer you?
janneman said:
Jan, maby one day we could meet, drink some good wine and I will explain to you.
It is really easy to understand, and you can post whatever papers you want.
I have experience with blind and sighted tests, and don't think it is only with my diying.
After the wine, I'll show you some... cables.
carlosfm said:
Any time, Carlos. I remember having some nice Dao wine, is that from your area?
But, in that case, NO talk about blind/sighted tests, OK? I get so tired of doing what feels like explaining an orgasm to a virgin.
Jan Didden
- Status
- Not open for further replies.