Thanks for the explanation Cilla.
So;- an open ended and tunable cable stub beyond the LS end of interconnect termination which modifies reproduction by introducing a reactive effect.
Due to the fact that LS interconnects always modify reproduction, I use the shortest 'one-per-driver' LS connection possible by using monoblocs right behind the LS, thus taking every output return directly back to the amplifier's signal input/output/earth star connection, which is unaffectable by any other wire connection.
Hi Soongsc,
Yes, clearly a different issue to Bud's original thread, but not one I have come across because I have used star grounded monoblocs since the '60s, and minimum length LS cables have always proved best for me.
Whether an 'electron pool' behind a LS could have an observable effect in my system is something I will retain an OPEN MIND about.
Cheers .......... Graham.
So;- an open ended and tunable cable stub beyond the LS end of interconnect termination which modifies reproduction by introducing a reactive effect.
Due to the fact that LS interconnects always modify reproduction, I use the shortest 'one-per-driver' LS connection possible by using monoblocs right behind the LS, thus taking every output return directly back to the amplifier's signal input/output/earth star connection, which is unaffectable by any other wire connection.
Hi Soongsc,
Yes, clearly a different issue to Bud's original thread, but not one I have come across because I have used star grounded monoblocs since the '60s, and minimum length LS cables have always proved best for me.
Whether an 'electron pool' behind a LS could have an observable effect in my system is something I will retain an OPEN MIND about.
Cheers .......... Graham.
Grayham Maynard
Not an open ended cable stub..... a... LOOP... of wire, actually with both ends trapped in the same place...... a shorted turn of wire... an impossibility, in short.... sorry... this foolishness is actually being alternately stomped on and lauded over there...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102180
Not related to intelligently grounded systems at all. I would consider your description of system grounding as intelligent, by the way, and strive for the same results in my own system.
These are instead, below signal return, meaning somewhere between earthy and system potential, LOOPS of wire, with a small amount of dielectric material left around them. Small in that some wire is left uncovered. In my own system this is 140 strands of #40 AWG coil winding wire, 150mm or so long, with three pieces, 15mm long, of shrink wrap tubing shrunk down tight and spaced along it's length.
Appears, from the general trend of other folks experimentation, to be a relationship between amount of surface area of copper to amount, and dielectric constant, of plastic coating, possibly affected by overall copper wire length and thin dielectric coatings applied, or not, on individual strands of the wire itself.
Not sane, rational, nor covered by anyone's mathematical activities, that I have discovered, to date. Try it, perhaps it will surprise you. Best part is, you don't have to tell anyone else you did!
Cilla
I do like your pluck! What will you look into for EnABLing materials next?
Try an Electron Pool loop at your speaker terminals too and report back please.
Bud
Not an open ended cable stub..... a... LOOP... of wire, actually with both ends trapped in the same place...... a shorted turn of wire... an impossibility, in short.... sorry... this foolishness is actually being alternately stomped on and lauded over there...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102180
Not related to intelligently grounded systems at all. I would consider your description of system grounding as intelligent, by the way, and strive for the same results in my own system.
These are instead, below signal return, meaning somewhere between earthy and system potential, LOOPS of wire, with a small amount of dielectric material left around them. Small in that some wire is left uncovered. In my own system this is 140 strands of #40 AWG coil winding wire, 150mm or so long, with three pieces, 15mm long, of shrink wrap tubing shrunk down tight and spaced along it's length.
Appears, from the general trend of other folks experimentation, to be a relationship between amount of surface area of copper to amount, and dielectric constant, of plastic coating, possibly affected by overall copper wire length and thin dielectric coatings applied, or not, on individual strands of the wire itself.
Not sane, rational, nor covered by anyone's mathematical activities, that I have discovered, to date. Try it, perhaps it will surprise you. Best part is, you don't have to tell anyone else you did!
Cilla
I do like your pluck! What will you look into for EnABLing materials next?
Try an Electron Pool loop at your speaker terminals too and report back please.
Bud
Thanks for the link Bud.
I now understand the physical construction of your 'electron pool'.
Certainly food for thought. Some systems were said to sound better when the LS chassis was connected to the earthy LS connection - remote electron pool wrt signal ?
Will not continue with that topic in this thread.
Cheers ........ Graham.
I now understand the physical construction of your 'electron pool'.
Certainly food for thought. Some systems were said to sound better when the LS chassis was connected to the earthy LS connection - remote electron pool wrt signal ?
Will not continue with that topic in this thread.
Cheers ........ Graham.
Choky
I did, and I deeply appreciate it. I might only need to have the portion that is devoted to the transformer translated. I do have all of the prints for the Alpha One amp and transformers, but I was not too clear on how much of a step back, if any, this amp is. Certainly fewer gain stages and obvious feed back points.
Also because there are mentions of ultra linear operation in the text, but it is not shown in the circuitry and I am also not sure if this OPT is as multifillar as the Alpha One was, with feed back circuits with signal shaping tank circuits attached to each one, in a very carefully orchestrated assault on distortion and sound stage integrity.
Never the less, thank you for all of your work, I intend to enjoy this.,
Bud
I did, and I deeply appreciate it. I might only need to have the portion that is devoted to the transformer translated. I do have all of the prints for the Alpha One amp and transformers, but I was not too clear on how much of a step back, if any, this amp is. Certainly fewer gain stages and obvious feed back points.
Also because there are mentions of ultra linear operation in the text, but it is not shown in the circuitry and I am also not sure if this OPT is as multifillar as the Alpha One was, with feed back circuits with signal shaping tank circuits attached to each one, in a very carefully orchestrated assault on distortion and sound stage integrity.
Never the less, thank you for all of your work, I intend to enjoy this.,
Bud
BudP said:
dunno,Bud...........
that's Mile's work from 1961.
full (translated) subject of work is something as
"EFE1 20 W lab amp" made for "Experimental Fonetics,Speech Pathology and Foreign Language Study Institute" in Belgrade .
besides that - I know for Alpha just from stories , not just one solid fact... (but- if you insist on sending me some further info,be my guest
)first part of text is dedicated to several ways and topologies to make various stages in amp,so UL is mentioned as one of them ; from schmtc is clear that Mile choose triode one as most adequate for needs of that amp.
in next few days I'll try to translate OPT related part from Serbian to my Engrish for you........
just one thing ........ I asked that before and no-one answered , even you
have you any experience with Eminence Alpha 6
http://audiotehnika.co.yu/pdf/alpha_6.pdf
if not- have you any possible tip for that interesting driver.......EnABL and maybe phase plug ?
there are few systems with Alpha 6 as core..... in creation ;
poor man's OBs ,with Beta15,Alpha 6 and APT80.......
tnx in advance....
Choky,
Having just wrestled a Hemp Acoustics 4.5 to the mat I can tell you the following, while only lying a little bit too.
The dust cap is an excellent design. It will have a slight phase lead, compared to the cone. This will be enhanced by the EnABL process, regardless of how much Gloss coat, if any, is used here. This can be controlled with a modestly larger dot of PVA than I ordinarily use. You will obtain an extended top end and most of the roughness they have "smoothed" out will actually disappear. A lot more high frequency dynamic ability will show up, you will in fact have some problems with it, and likely will have to resort to "special" electron pool tech to help shove the high frequencies into exact phase alignment under all dynamic conditions.
The suspension looks well thought out. The EnABL process will add effective lower frequency reach and considerable dynamic headroom to what is portrayed in the specs.
A very good candidate for two sided EnABL treatment with the added clarity and transparency to micro dynamic information that backside treatment provides.
Also have a look at their Beta 8 model. Very similar build and frequency response. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&PartNumber=290-404
Bud
Having just wrestled a Hemp Acoustics 4.5 to the mat I can tell you the following, while only lying a little bit too.
The dust cap is an excellent design. It will have a slight phase lead, compared to the cone. This will be enhanced by the EnABL process, regardless of how much Gloss coat, if any, is used here. This can be controlled with a modestly larger dot of PVA than I ordinarily use. You will obtain an extended top end and most of the roughness they have "smoothed" out will actually disappear. A lot more high frequency dynamic ability will show up, you will in fact have some problems with it, and likely will have to resort to "special" electron pool tech to help shove the high frequencies into exact phase alignment under all dynamic conditions.
The suspension looks well thought out. The EnABL process will add effective lower frequency reach and considerable dynamic headroom to what is portrayed in the specs.
A very good candidate for two sided EnABL treatment with the added clarity and transparency to micro dynamic information that backside treatment provides.
Also have a look at their Beta 8 model. Very similar build and frequency response. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&PartNumber=290-404
Bud
BudP said:
tnx Bud ;
regarding phase plug for Alpha 6 ?
you expect any benefit or not?
any particular EnABL pattern or just generic one - two rows on outer and two on inner perimeter ?
I'll be back with few more Q's ...........
....interesting ..... boyz from Bottlehead have few nice shows on CES with Alpha 6+ Selenium slot tweet in sorta satellites ........if we can trust net sources ...
Choky,
Cannot help you with the phase plug. I can say that they must also be EnABL'd if that is used on the rest of the driver.
Personally I would not choose a phase plug first. But, I have zero experience with them and so, am an unreliable witness to dust cap decapitation. Thirty years without needing them will do that to you.....
I have just beaten the caps into submission with my EnABL hammer and moved on.
Dave from Planet 10 is the person to plague about phase plugs.
Bud
Cannot help you with the phase plug. I can say that they must also be EnABL'd if that is used on the rest of the driver.
Personally I would not choose a phase plug first. But, I have zero experience with them and so, am an unreliable witness to dust cap decapitation. Thirty years without needing them will do that to you.....
I have just beaten the caps into submission with my EnABL hammer and moved on.
Dave from Planet 10 is the person to plague about phase plugs.
Bud
BudP said:
fair enough
I presume that P10 have same xperience as me ( and vice versa
) that phase plug is almost always good thing ,even in cases when dust cup is of proper design ....and Alpha 6 have exactly that type of dust cap ,concluding from your posts in >who knows now which thread< ......benefits are certainly clearer upper register driver in case can perform and ,in most cases, somewhat extended high range .......
my asking was mainly about possible drawbacks or conflicts or even un-necessity of phase plug when same is introduced along with EnABL pattern.........
anyway- I'll try both and choose ..........
hehe
noting just one thing- I like phase plugs........
Zen Mod said:I presume that P10 have same xperience as me ( and vice versa
Yes. Pretty much.
Did my 1st rings tonight. 2 sets of practise drivers + some test mules (3 variations on the FE127 treatment + the lone set of FF125 i have) All colour coded. Hopefully i'll get better with practise.
dave
Attachments
Lowthers & EnABL
My PM6A Ticonals that Bud treated for me are now broken in. 8 ohm, silver voice coil for those interested in the details. CLIO was used to measure both treated and untreated units. Interestingly, there was little difference in the measurements. Frequency response, phase response, and waterfall showed little difference between the two.
Listening was a different matter. The EnABLed drivers had a sharper transient response. The initial attack on instruments, such as a well recorded piano note of intensity, was more accurate with the EnABLed drivers. The same note without EnABL was just slightly rounded off.
There was also a little bit of extra clarity. This was especially noticable in the extreme highs.
Imaging was enhanced. Front to rear, side to side both became noticably better. This was more a matter of precision, as if the image was just better focused.
The PM6A Ticonal is one of my favorite drivers. The EnABL process here made a great driver a little bit better, allowing it to more accurately follow the recording. I always refer to changes in my system as being signficant or not. In example, if you have to listen carefully to recordings you know well, and then decide which is better, that change is not significant. If you can tell the difference when walking into the room that is significant. To my ears, the addition of the EnABL material is significant, and a step in the right direction.
My PM6A Ticonals that Bud treated for me are now broken in. 8 ohm, silver voice coil for those interested in the details. CLIO was used to measure both treated and untreated units. Interestingly, there was little difference in the measurements. Frequency response, phase response, and waterfall showed little difference between the two.
Listening was a different matter. The EnABLed drivers had a sharper transient response. The initial attack on instruments, such as a well recorded piano note of intensity, was more accurate with the EnABLed drivers. The same note without EnABL was just slightly rounded off.
There was also a little bit of extra clarity. This was especially noticable in the extreme highs.
Imaging was enhanced. Front to rear, side to side both became noticably better. This was more a matter of precision, as if the image was just better focused.
The PM6A Ticonal is one of my favorite drivers. The EnABL process here made a great driver a little bit better, allowing it to more accurately follow the recording. I always refer to changes in my system as being signficant or not. In example, if you have to listen carefully to recordings you know well, and then decide which is better, that change is not significant. If you can tell the difference when walking into the room that is significant. To my ears, the addition of the EnABL material is significant, and a step in the right direction.
EnABLED frequency response
All measurements taken 3' on axis. Keep in mind that these are significantly flatter in response when listened to 15 degrees off axis. The measurements are unsmoothed. So I am showing these in the least flattering light - just like Lynn Olsen likes em. Here they go:
Dang! Files too large to post. Perhaps later.
All measurements taken 3' on axis. Keep in mind that these are significantly flatter in response when listened to 15 degrees off axis. The measurements are unsmoothed. So I am showing these in the least flattering light - just like Lynn Olsen likes em. Here they go:
Dang! Files too large to post. Perhaps later.
FR 4.5C Update
Hello All,
I thought I should report back to you all about my experiences with the Hemp Acoustics FR 4.5C driver that Bud treated. I am happy to say that I did not experience nearly the difficulties that Limono discussed with his Lowthers. Upon receipt of the patterned drivers, I swapped out the stock FE126E drivers in my horn resonators purchased from Ed Schilling at The Horn Shoppe, in Leesville, SC. I originally got the hempcone drivers because I was curious about the buzz I was hearing about the new drivers from Hemp Acoustics. I could not get any definitive reports from actual users, so when I found out they made a driver that was sized to replace the FE126/127, I bit for a pair. I could hear them in my existing enclosure with only a tiny effort. No need to build another enclosure just to hear them.
Then a tip from a friend sent me to this forum/thread...and I got caught up in the concepts being presented. Such brilliance and such beautiful cooperation being shown. So, without ever hearing the stock hemps, I offered them up to fate and Buds' machinations. They were sent off to god-knows-where WA to be treated to god-knows-what 'snake-oil treatments' to god-knows-what end, by a fella named Bud. Well, let me tell you that it was the best thing I have done to my audio since using silver creme on my electrical contacts. Bud is a true genius and a very nice gentleman to boot.
So, what happened you ask? Listening to the drivers with both tube (Yaqin MS-300B) and digital (KingRex and PanasonicSA XR-55) amps, with CDP to Paradisea+ and WAV files from laptop to Paradisea+, both to the tube or digital gear and with Buds speaker wires and Electron Pools, the sound is simply awesome. For the first 48 hrs I experienced spotty setbacks as the drivers, wires and EPs burned/broke in. Sometimes I would get a hint of the soundstage that was to come, only to have everything close back up. Having experienced similar things with the Fostex drivers I plunged on, throwing all kinds of music from Classical to Jazz to Folk, World, Rock and anything else I could find. Volume whisper quiet to leave-the-house-and-hope-the-neighbors-a-quarter-mile-away-don't-get-too-angry/disturbed. (slight exageration for effect) The soundstage has finally settled a bit to something very wide and deep (100+ hrs). The highs roll off the EnABLed little driver like butter on a hot August day. Fast transients are effortless. Dynamics are better than I have ever heard from the already fine FE126E. Bass extension is wonderful. The high end is crystal clear and detailed, but with no needles-in-the-ear that I have experienced with the FE126Es with digital amps (specifically the Trends TA 10.1.1). Much of this is no doubt due to the fine driver. A lot of the result is due to Buds pattern. More fine detail due to wires and/or Electron Pools. I noticed a definite improvement in clarity with the 'pools dangling from my binding posts. I put them on and off several times and they are now on for good. These drivers make effortless, beautiful music, assuming your source is good of course. They will reveal shortcomings and ruthlessly project them.
Upshot? If you are contemplating getting a pair of the drivers, do so...now. DIY the pattern Bud has so generously provided in this thread, or contact Bud and pay him to do it for you. Get some Electron Pools or make them yourself as others have...IMHO this is not 'snake-oil'. This is serious audio. I don't regret any of the expense I have encountered and all will stay in my system until better comes along (doubtful). Do it and hear it for yourself, or not. Your choice. Now, back to the music...
Richard
Hello All,
I thought I should report back to you all about my experiences with the Hemp Acoustics FR 4.5C driver that Bud treated. I am happy to say that I did not experience nearly the difficulties that Limono discussed with his Lowthers. Upon receipt of the patterned drivers, I swapped out the stock FE126E drivers in my horn resonators purchased from Ed Schilling at The Horn Shoppe, in Leesville, SC. I originally got the hempcone drivers because I was curious about the buzz I was hearing about the new drivers from Hemp Acoustics. I could not get any definitive reports from actual users, so when I found out they made a driver that was sized to replace the FE126/127, I bit for a pair. I could hear them in my existing enclosure with only a tiny effort. No need to build another enclosure just to hear them.
Then a tip from a friend sent me to this forum/thread...and I got caught up in the concepts being presented. Such brilliance and such beautiful cooperation being shown. So, without ever hearing the stock hemps, I offered them up to fate and Buds' machinations. They were sent off to god-knows-where WA to be treated to god-knows-what 'snake-oil treatments' to god-knows-what end, by a fella named Bud. Well, let me tell you that it was the best thing I have done to my audio since using silver creme on my electrical contacts. Bud is a true genius and a very nice gentleman to boot.
So, what happened you ask? Listening to the drivers with both tube (Yaqin MS-300B) and digital (KingRex and PanasonicSA XR-55) amps, with CDP to Paradisea+ and WAV files from laptop to Paradisea+, both to the tube or digital gear and with Buds speaker wires and Electron Pools, the sound is simply awesome. For the first 48 hrs I experienced spotty setbacks as the drivers, wires and EPs burned/broke in. Sometimes I would get a hint of the soundstage that was to come, only to have everything close back up. Having experienced similar things with the Fostex drivers I plunged on, throwing all kinds of music from Classical to Jazz to Folk, World, Rock and anything else I could find. Volume whisper quiet to leave-the-house-and-hope-the-neighbors-a-quarter-mile-away-don't-get-too-angry/disturbed. (slight exageration for effect) The soundstage has finally settled a bit to something very wide and deep (100+ hrs). The highs roll off the EnABLed little driver like butter on a hot August day. Fast transients are effortless. Dynamics are better than I have ever heard from the already fine FE126E. Bass extension is wonderful. The high end is crystal clear and detailed, but with no needles-in-the-ear that I have experienced with the FE126Es with digital amps (specifically the Trends TA 10.1.1). Much of this is no doubt due to the fine driver. A lot of the result is due to Buds pattern. More fine detail due to wires and/or Electron Pools. I noticed a definite improvement in clarity with the 'pools dangling from my binding posts. I put them on and off several times and they are now on for good. These drivers make effortless, beautiful music, assuming your source is good of course. They will reveal shortcomings and ruthlessly project them.
Upshot? If you are contemplating getting a pair of the drivers, do so...now. DIY the pattern Bud has so generously provided in this thread, or contact Bud and pay him to do it for you. Get some Electron Pools or make them yourself as others have...IMHO this is not 'snake-oil'. This is serious audio. I don't regret any of the expense I have encountered and all will stay in my system until better comes along (doubtful). Do it and hear it for yourself, or not. Your choice. Now, back to the music...
Richard
Re: EnABLED frequency response
That is a slightly more succinct descriptor than i concocted after having a good listen to the FE127 Bud did up... from a 1m sat picture on a day with whisps of clouds to a 1/2m on a sunny day.
Send me the files, i'm good at making them fit.
dave
Jon Ver Halen said:
That is a slightly more succinct descriptor than i concocted after having a good listen to the FE127 Bud did up... from a 1m sat picture on a day with whisps of clouds to a 1/2m on a sunny day.
Send me the files, i'm good at making them fit.
dave
- Status
- Not open for further replies.