carlosfm said:
😱
U-n-b-e-l-i-e-v-a-b-l-e.
😱
Incredible.
You are doing now exactly the same thing you were accusing me of a while back: assuming how the circuit sounds without listening to it.
At least I made an effort and have built your amp.
Peter Daniel said:
Peter you posted a pic of your pre.
I KNOW the OPA2604 very well and I know it doesn't sound good that way.
You even make things worse by putting the caps on sockets.
You said (your own words) that changing ICs (the op-amps) doesn't make "much of an improvement".😱
This is unbelievable, even more so coming from you, the one who says that can hear the polarity of a resistor.😱
Then why the LM3875?
Why not the TDA7293?
Does it make "much of a difference"?
So many fancy caps, resistors, regs...
BTW, the problem of your pre is not the regs.
All this makes me not giving much importance to what you think about the amp, the regulated PSU, whatever.
People are free to try it, listen and judge for themselves.
For me it's all said, have a nice night, it's late here.
carlosfm said:
You said (your own words) that changing ICs (the op-amps) doesn't make "much of an improvement".😱
This is unbelievable, even more so coming from you, the one who says that can hear the polarity of a resistor.😱
My words were exactly like this:
Peter Daniel said:
I also said that.
While trying to share my observations and maybe provide some input for others, it only seems like I'm bringing myself down. I guess Elso was right, saying this forum is going downhill.
Sorry for trying (making an effort).
While trying to share my observations and maybe provide some input for others, it only seems like I'm bringing myself down. I guess Elso was right, saying this forum is going downhill.
Sorry for trying (making an effort).
Peter Daniel said:
Peter Daniel said:
There are long time lurkers here that greatly appreciate that effort, and learned worlds about construction techniques from your posts without you ever knowing. Thanks Peter, and don't sweat the small stuff.
Peter Daniel said:
Exactly. This thread is embarassing in many ways. I think your efforts are better served by a new thread on a carte blanche design of a PS for a GC. Just to think of all good work posted on this board (not this forum 🙂 ) about PS design and 3-term reg noise.....ughh, I feel nauseous...
I see this board became very competetive. Even Fred started bugging me with e-mails today. He is also into regulated GC supplies and actually claims that he "has regulated chip amps". I thought he took them apart (and into parts bin) long time ago.
Post #1183; http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9112&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=48
Post #1183; http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9112&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=48
There is something going on between Peter and Carlos that is hard to put a finger on, but I will try anyway.
I tend to trust Carlos judgment about what "sounds" good because he seems to have better engineering instincts overall. Most of the things he tries have a physical reason, while Peter tends to do things in a more black-magic way.
I'm sure Peter sometimes get fabulous results doing this, but I have an engineering background, so I have more faith in Carlos' method.
Carlos seems to think that Peter has made errors in building his design that are going to affect the sound. Could he be right?
Meanwhile Peter seems to be doing his bit of trying one expensive gold-plated addition after another and listening to the results, but has apparently not paid as much attention to keeping signal paths short or some other issues, as Carlos would prefer, and Carlos also finds this irritating.
Some phrases in posts made here by Peter (inadvertently or not) indicate to me and probably to Carlos that Peter already has an opinion about his implementation of Carlos design before doing much testing. He also feels the need to make snide remarks about things "not being implemented correctly" or something to that effect.
Part of Carlos irritation comes from being ****ed that Peters isselling kits, and then hanging around here, as if trolling for new ideas. I would like to persuade Carlos that kits are a good thang, but the rather overpriced/overengineered box Peter is selling does seem a bit of an opportunist.
Both of you pick fights a lot with each other. But a bit more of the venom is coming from Peter, IMHO, so the way Peter is methaphorically "rolling his eyes" right now about how bad this forum is in some part his own doing. We were pretty happy here before Peter and Carlos started fighting with each other. The rest of us weren't having much problems with Carlos.
Now Peter is doing listening tests, comparing a rough implementation of Carlos design with a battery-powered amplifier. If this is going to be fair they both have to be mains powered. That is quite a no-brainer. Batteries would tend to solve the very problem that the regulated supply is trying to fix. But batteries don't have to be connected to a source of all sorts of potential problems, either. So the test isn't fair unless it also includes a non-regulated mains powered unit.
I would suspect that Carlos design would compare better to the battery unit than not, but the unregulated design would have the problems with being bass-shy noted in many, many other posts.
******
Testing also should be at least single blinded. Switch between A & B or even C but you shouldn't know which amp is which until the test is over. Otherwise, you can fool yourself big time, especially when you are listening for small (or even non-existent) differences.
I'm not particularly enamoured of double blind testing because it makes it too hard for the brain to make accurate associations between the sound of a passage and a particular device. Sometimes things are so obvious that they would jump out at you in a double blind test. Other times, the differences are there, but are more subtle. These things can be very important in a long session of listening but are hard to find in double-blind test.
I tend to trust Carlos judgment about what "sounds" good because he seems to have better engineering instincts overall. Most of the things he tries have a physical reason, while Peter tends to do things in a more black-magic way.
I'm sure Peter sometimes get fabulous results doing this, but I have an engineering background, so I have more faith in Carlos' method.
Carlos seems to think that Peter has made errors in building his design that are going to affect the sound. Could he be right?
Meanwhile Peter seems to be doing his bit of trying one expensive gold-plated addition after another and listening to the results, but has apparently not paid as much attention to keeping signal paths short or some other issues, as Carlos would prefer, and Carlos also finds this irritating.
Some phrases in posts made here by Peter (inadvertently or not) indicate to me and probably to Carlos that Peter already has an opinion about his implementation of Carlos design before doing much testing. He also feels the need to make snide remarks about things "not being implemented correctly" or something to that effect.
Part of Carlos irritation comes from being ****ed that Peters isselling kits, and then hanging around here, as if trolling for new ideas. I would like to persuade Carlos that kits are a good thang, but the rather overpriced/overengineered box Peter is selling does seem a bit of an opportunist.
Both of you pick fights a lot with each other. But a bit more of the venom is coming from Peter, IMHO, so the way Peter is methaphorically "rolling his eyes" right now about how bad this forum is in some part his own doing. We were pretty happy here before Peter and Carlos started fighting with each other. The rest of us weren't having much problems with Carlos.
Now Peter is doing listening tests, comparing a rough implementation of Carlos design with a battery-powered amplifier. If this is going to be fair they both have to be mains powered. That is quite a no-brainer. Batteries would tend to solve the very problem that the regulated supply is trying to fix. But batteries don't have to be connected to a source of all sorts of potential problems, either. So the test isn't fair unless it also includes a non-regulated mains powered unit.
I would suspect that Carlos design would compare better to the battery unit than not, but the unregulated design would have the problems with being bass-shy noted in many, many other posts.
******
Testing also should be at least single blinded. Switch between A & B or even C but you shouldn't know which amp is which until the test is over. Otherwise, you can fool yourself big time, especially when you are listening for small (or even non-existent) differences.
I'm not particularly enamoured of double blind testing because it makes it too hard for the brain to make accurate associations between the sound of a passage and a particular device. Sometimes things are so obvious that they would jump out at you in a double blind test. Other times, the differences are there, but are more subtle. These things can be very important in a long session of listening but are hard to find in double-blind test.
geewhizbang said:
Ugh...
Instead of guessing which you will prefer, which is essentially what you are doing if your decisions are based on what you read rather than what your ears tell you, WHY NOT BUILD BOTH AMPS????? Better still, build ten different amps.
I'm not taking sides here, but what does engineering have to do with hearing / taste in hi-fi, anyway? That's not to say one excludes the other. I value science and tend to accept explained phenomena better than unexplained, myself. It doesn't make me a good judge of equipment and an explanation doesn't make the music sound better - or maybe it does for some?????
This is all so ridiculously subjective that I can't believe time is wasted like this. You guys wouldn't spend this much effort arguing and defending what flavour or brand of jam you prefer, would you??? Anyone dismissing this analogy as oversimplified or not appropriate to the debate is headed directly for audiophile burnout - I guarantee it.
If your goal is enjoyable music playback, it is *ONLY* about your taste. Unless the primary reason for a change in your audio system is because you like the way it sounds in your system, you are pushing a rope.
Pass the toast, please.
geewhizbang said:
I agree on that, both Carlos and Peter are "biased" against each other so, unless one admits the other is right
this fight seems to bring nowhere.I think that before judging a circuit that was developed (also with trial and error) not in a daytime it would be better to experiment a little and, of course, the comparison should be with "standard" unregulated GC. Using batteries supply reminds me of a friend who compared my Aleph30 with his Yamaha MX-1000 (250W amp...) at loud volumes in a big room.... my amp sounded good but was "a bit bass shy...."
I also think that, seen the importance of the buffer in Carlos' design, it can't be left away.
But a thing is clear: pointing the finger to each other (Peter saying it's Carlos' circuit and Carlos saying it's Peter's implementation) isn't very costructive.
I'd say post your test conditions and your impressions, but avoid blaming each other. I am sure that the guys here can draw their own conclusions, best if based on personal experience (that's what I'm going to do).
Cheers
Andrea
I have to guess at this point what I'd prefer since this is my first amp project. I did pretty well with my guesses on which speakers to purchase and crossover design for my speakers. I researched the heck out of it and bought something rather obscure but very good indeed.
Carlos' design efforts have a logic to them that seems missing in what Peter is doing. Thats all I can do right now.
Peter comes in here with a chip on his shoulder about regulated / inverted PS, and gives the main proponent of this a hard time over and over in this forum. Can you wonder that it ****es Carlos just a bit, especially since Peter is SELLING kits that are non-inverted and non-regulated. There IS a rather unseemly conflict of interest.
Sort of like Dick Cheney and Halliburton, but just move the decimal places a quite a few digits to the left. 😀
Carlos' design efforts have a logic to them that seems missing in what Peter is doing. Thats all I can do right now.
Peter comes in here with a chip on his shoulder about regulated / inverted PS, and gives the main proponent of this a hard time over and over in this forum. Can you wonder that it ****es Carlos just a bit, especially since Peter is SELLING kits that are non-inverted and non-regulated. There IS a rather unseemly conflict of interest.
Sort of like Dick Cheney and Halliburton, but just move the decimal places a quite a few digits to the left. 😀
geewhizbang said:
You only have to guess if it's your *last* amp project. People are too afraid they'll make the wrong choice. If you get on with it (as opposed to endless research) you can use the time saved to change it later.
Are you sure of this logic??? Again, I'm not taking sides, but the original inspiration for this forum (or the predecessor to this forum) was the 47 Labs Gaincard - a product that's garnered much praise for its sound and achieved it by eschewing the technology and engineering everyone already "knew" and instead favoured simplicity. If you didn't know this then your homework is incomplete.
Uhhh...Peter isn't selling chip amp kits.
You guys bang on about this conflict of interest, but here is a guy that shares *everything* he does and how he does it with the members of the Asylum, right down to the last detail. It seems rather more likely that this forum loses money for him given the amount of time he puts in here. The money to be made in this gig is from guys who can't or wont DIY, and even then it likely isn't much.
If you guys think Peter's getting wealthy from DIYAudio.com, well, that's the best laugh I've had all day.
Well at least Peter has heard his regulated IGC! I seem to be as cursed as this thread! 😉
I got my replacement LM338 and put it in. Tested the module and I got 26.2 volts positive and 26.4 volts negative. I'm not worried about 0.2 volts difference!
So, I diconnect the module from it's test rig (the 'spare' transformer/rectifiers and some old 10,000 uF caps. Before I put it back in situ in the new amp, I double check the supply voltages at the 10,000 uFs and find that I have +/-36 VDC as expected.
I reinstall the regulator module, power up and ---- whoosh, off goes that same cap again!
So, why does the module work OK until I put it in the amp? Same transformer, rectifier bridges and rail voltages. Regulator module not connected to anything else (except meter) in either case.
This is a weird one even by electronics standards! 😕
I got my replacement LM338 and put it in. Tested the module and I got 26.2 volts positive and 26.4 volts negative. I'm not worried about 0.2 volts difference!
So, I diconnect the module from it's test rig (the 'spare' transformer/rectifiers and some old 10,000 uF caps. Before I put it back in situ in the new amp, I double check the supply voltages at the 10,000 uFs and find that I have +/-36 VDC as expected.
I reinstall the regulator module, power up and ---- whoosh, off goes that same cap again!
So, why does the module work OK until I put it in the amp? Same transformer, rectifier bridges and rail voltages. Regulator module not connected to anything else (except meter) in either case.
This is a weird one even by electronics standards! 😕
geewhizbang said:
I am actually the one selling kits. I only recently decided to have Peter help me ship them out, as it was taking up more time that I have (I do have a full time job, unlike others on this board). I only shipped the parts to him (for international/canadian order) at the end of last week, and he should receive them at the end of this week. Up to this point, he hasn't shipped any kits out. Without his help, I would have had to limit the kit sales.
I have shipped well over 500 pcbs out to people (many of these with kits). I can see no way that this is not a good thing for the diy community in general. Not everyone can wire up the circuit point-to-point, and the kit makes it quite a bit easier to build a gainclone. There are not huge profit margins on the kits, and I have donated $500 to diyAudio thus far. Any issues with the kits should be addressed to me.
I have gotten countless e-mails from people satisified with the kits, and here are pictures from a fraction of the satisified people:
http://www.briangt.com/gallery/nigc
While I wouldn't purchase Peter's commercial product, it is still cheaper than the gaincard...
--
Brian
Nuuk said:
I can't see if you have isolation washers on the regs, do you?
If not could there be a short that occurs when you put the module in the amp?
I'm grasping at straws here.
You say the reg isn't hooked to anything except the meter - is it hooked to the amp circuit? If it is it seems possible you've got excessive current draw on one chip from an oscillation.
C'mon folks! How can anyone not agree with the above comment? Neither of you two (Carlos & Peter) are going to agree except to disagree and you know what? That's perfectly okay (normal.)
I can tell you one thing I know for certain. I'm extremely new to all this but nothing either of you says will cause me to take one point of view over anothers. The only thing that will is for me to try each and to see for myself, re: top comment. After trying both and finding I preferred one I would still keep it hush hush because there's no need to add fuel to this fire 😉 Fortunately I'm finding it all so terribly confusing that it makes little difference 😀
So both setups, versions, call-them-what-you-will clearly work and work well. If I got 50 people in a room not all would like the same one and likely some of that 50 would like neither - golden ears or not!
We end up back at the beginning, the original comment from Jeff. Well said, sir.
Hi Jeff,
The regulators are not insulated from the heatsinks but the heatsinks are not in contact with each other or anything else.
Installation of the module in the amp involves it sitting in an acrylic 'cradle'. There is nothing conductive anywhere near the module that could cause a short.
The module is NOT connected to the amp circuit so it can't be excessive current draw.
You say you are 'cluctching at straws' but I have even run out of straws to clutch! 😉
The other module works fine on the same power supply so this one is a real mystery. I am taking a break at present at it will require a clear head to start sorting this one out! 🙁
Nick, what is different then? Have you checked the resistors? Other components you have on the board / in the cradle?Nuuk said:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.