joensd said:
Jens, what's on the datasheets are basic guidelines.
If you're happy and it's good enough for you to make an amp like that on the datasheet, fine for me.
joensd said:
You're absolutely right!
As long as people don't try to convince me that one thing is better just because they have the PCBs or the complete amps to sell...
I have my head on it's place, I have my own ideas, I think by myself, I'm not happy with just what I see on the net.
And when I report something better, with all my good intentions, someone says it's not, without even testing...
I tested too many ways of making a "GC" (if I can still call that) and I'm opening my ideas, my hard work, to the diy community.
What do I get with this?
So, better shut up, keep my things for myself, and laugh in the background.😀
Re: Re: Let's make this clear, Peter
No, it's just because I know I'm right.
You confuse passive with active...
I think you still didn't understand what I was saying, but forget it.
I'm not your R&D department.
Peter Daniel said:
No, it's just because I know I'm right.
You confuse passive with active...
I think you still didn't understand what I was saying, but forget it.
I'm not your R&D department.
It has to do with crediiblity. Peter is selling such stuff for the gainclone and I can't see a good reason for such overdesign.
It really doesn't look all that good for all of the overdesign, either. Perhaps others have a budget for this, I don't.
Carlos, I´m glad you got what I wanted to say. (and not exploded like others do😉 )
I just thought I mention again that we are talking about chipamps so nothing new really and neither anything very special.
The TDA7294 is about 8years old now and the "overture" series of chips from NS a bit younger.
I believe you can improve certain things but regulated supplies, in buffers embedded pots and the like are no real secrets.
That doesn´t mean I still appreciate you talk about your efforts and especially your successes with certain techniques.
But still there´s not much to copy.
And well, if we´re serious about chips we should maybe give Nelson´s supersymmetry a try?
Best regards
Jens
I just thought I mention again that we are talking about chipamps so nothing new really and neither anything very special.
The TDA7294 is about 8years old now and the "overture" series of chips from NS a bit younger.
I believe you can improve certain things but regulated supplies, in buffers embedded pots and the like are no real secrets.
That doesn´t mean I still appreciate you talk about your efforts and especially your successes with certain techniques.
But still there´s not much to copy.
And well, if we´re serious about chips we should maybe give Nelson´s supersymmetry a try?
Best regards
Jens
geewhizbang said:
The reason is simple. It's much easier to do it from thick panels, as you don't have to use any additional brackets to connect those panels. The design would be actually more expensive (or at least in the same price range) if thinner, sheet metal panels were being used. The box is also more mechanically stable this way also.
Jens, I never said I invented something, did I?
It's just different from what everybody's doing.
Inverted LM3886+OPA627 Buffer+Regulated supply is better that what's being done here, IMHO.
PCB layout is very important too, but that's another story.😀
It's just different from what everybody's doing.
Inverted LM3886+OPA627 Buffer+Regulated supply is better that what's being done here, IMHO.
PCB layout is very important too, but that's another story.😀
Re: Re: Re: Let's make this clear, Peter
At one time, I used to be your R&D department:
I wonder when this time you'll realise that the problem is somewhere else.😉
BTW: I hate doing it to you.
carlosfm said:
No, it's just because I know I'm right.
I'm not your R&D department.
At one time, I used to be your R&D department:
carlosfm said:
Come on, Peter, I've got back to 1000uf some time ago.😀
To be more pecise, 2000uf total per rail, as I have one toroid for both channels.
Some time ago I added capacitance to the PSU, but the problem was elsewhere.😉
It's now fantastic, and I love my old EPOS ES11 speakers more and more each time I listen to them.
That midband and treble makes me.
The amp helps, too.🙂
I wonder when this time you'll realise that the problem is somewhere else.😉
BTW: I hate doing it to you.
Carlos, Jockos negative commments would apply equally well to you or Peter. I don't like the negative approach for it's own sake....
I honestly didn't! 🙁
Come on guys, this is meant to be a pleasurable hobby! Read up what is going on in the Sudan and then put all these comments into context. 😉
Development of the Gainclone has come about as a result of all our co-operation AND attempts at different concepts. If we all liked exactly the same design it would be kind of boring around here!
And do remember, we all have slightly different hearing!
Nuuk said:
I honestly didn't! 🙁
Come on guys, this is meant to be a pleasurable hobby! Read up what is going on in the Sudan and then put all these comments into context. 😉
Development of the Gainclone has come about as a result of all our co-operation AND attempts at different concepts. If we all liked exactly the same design it would be kind of boring around here!
And do remember, we all have slightly different hearing!
I already stated that I don't have any intention to argue. It's all in Carlos hands.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's make this clear, Peter
You have done good things, but unfortunately not anymore...
You beat all the records for opening new threads, you learned alot here, aren't you sincere enough to recognize this?
Since I made my first GC, I made too many tests, always improving.
The problem you like to focus was related to my Kimber cable, and I told you the solution, didn't I?😉
For ages you were defending the inverting topology, and suddenly you tried non-inverting and turned everything around.
At least I'm coherent, I never said NI is better than I.
What I say is the two topologies have their advantadges and disadvantages, a different approach.
But ultimately, the inverting can be made the best.
LM4780 datasheet, page 19 (anyway, this is basic for op-amps):
"The inverting amplifier can have better THD+N performance..."
That's funny.😀Peter Daniel said:
You have done good things, but unfortunately not anymore...
You beat all the records for opening new threads, you learned alot here, aren't you sincere enough to recognize this?
Peter Daniel said:
Since I made my first GC, I made too many tests, always improving.
The problem you like to focus was related to my Kimber cable, and I told you the solution, didn't I?😉
For ages you were defending the inverting topology, and suddenly you tried non-inverting and turned everything around.
At least I'm coherent, I never said NI is better than I.
What I say is the two topologies have their advantadges and disadvantages, a different approach.
But ultimately, the inverting can be made the best.
LM4780 datasheet, page 19 (anyway, this is basic for op-amps):
"The inverting amplifier can have better THD+N performance..."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's make this clear, Peter
Read my signature Carlos, that's the line I noticed yesterday in someone elses post. I think it was related to distortion figures as well. I like it a lot😉
carlosfm said:
Read my signature Carlos, that's the line I noticed yesterday in someone elses post. I think it was related to distortion figures as well. I like it a lot😉
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's make this clear, Peter
I don't give much importance to measurements too.
As you may have noticed, I always talk of what I listen.
Peter Daniel said:
I don't give much importance to measurements too.
As you may have noticed, I always talk of what I listen.
Hi,
Could it be that at that time there wasn't even a remote thought about going commercial with some gainclones?
Guess you haven't really understood what it really means then?
BTW, besides a regulated supply there are still half a dozen areas in the PS of the GC that can still be improved but hey, I've done my homework ages ago already...
Cheers,😉
Could it be that at that time there wasn't even a remote thought about going commercial with some gainclones?
Guess you haven't really understood what it really means then?
BTW, besides a regulated supply there are still half a dozen areas in the PS of the GC that can still be improved but hey, I've done my homework ages ago already...
Cheers,😉
fdegrove said:
This only tells me that you didn't understand it either.
And come on Frank, show us your GC amp. You seem to know so much about them that I don't believe anylonger you didn't build one.
jam said:
I see you just let another cat out of the bag. But it looks like you did it in a wrong thread.
fdegrove said:
As usually you are right to the point. If it wasn't for commercial thing I would have probably still claimed that inverted topology is the best.
But response we got from customers, claiming that Gaincard sounded better, didn't let us ignore that fact, and eventually we tried the non inverting amps. From that moment there is simply not going back. We now often receive a different type of response: that AMP-1 is actually preferred to GainCard.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.