jackinnj said:
I would agree. the problem is that not many of us are truly gifted in listening, circuit design, and manufacturing / assembly. and we don't have a lot of equipment to help us identify the finer things. as a result, making decisions off what you read on the internet is like being led by a blind: not that it is impossible but it is improbable for us to tell two chip amps apart, let along which is better.
This is probably fine for DIY. but for commercialization of DIY designs?
use one's strength to find enemy's weakness
that's an old chinese saying.
the whole peter vs. carlos debate reminds me of that. Peter is very good in mechanical design, but cannot hold the candle when it comes to electronics (and listening as well). Carlos is very creative and gifted in engineering but doesn't seem to pay much attention to assembly.
What happened, to me anyway, is Peter trying to use his weakness (electronics) to fight Carlos' strength.
if all of us can just focus on what we do better and stop the bickering, this would have been a much better place.
that's an old chinese saying.
the whole peter vs. carlos debate reminds me of that. Peter is very good in mechanical design, but cannot hold the candle when it comes to electronics (and listening as well). Carlos is very creative and gifted in engineering but doesn't seem to pay much attention to assembly.
What happened, to me anyway, is Peter trying to use his weakness (electronics) to fight Carlos' strength.
if all of us can just focus on what we do better and stop the bickering, this would have been a much better place.
Re: Stay tuned, guys...
Ok, this will have to be quick, I have some more cds to get through😉
I built Carlos OPA627 buffer last night to try, I used the OPA627BP, I have been using Pedja's 2sk170 discrete since I built the amp with excellent results.
Both ciruits are built point 2 point on plain veroboard, no exotic capacitors etc are used.
I ran it from the same psu's I used for the discrete buffer.
It had been running for about 20 minutes and my initial impression was good, the bass is very deep but seemed a bit slow, mids was very nice and vocals sounded very emmotional on some tracks but lacked a little air.
I decided to stick my test and burn cd on repeat and leave the amp running all night into a dummy load and try it again when I finished work.
I have been listening to it again now, the first thing that is obvious is the bass😱 , especially the low notes on piano, incredible, its so much better than what I heard last night, also vocals have improved and now sound very focused, everything sounds better placed and the mids more free, the thing sounds so enjoyable its hard to pull yourself away.
Both Carlos and Pedja's buffers are excellent and are certainly worth building (please give them time to burn in especially the opa627 circuit), I also tried the amp in inverting and non inverting with and without buffers.
In my opinion buffer/ inverted easily sounds the best, the amp just sounds more musical.
Next thing I want to try is Pedja's discrete regulator circuit, has anybody else compared this against the Lm338T?
Leon
carlosfm said:There's someone compulsively listening to music, as soon as he can stop, he will report his findings.😀
It may take hours, it may take days?😀
Ok, this will have to be quick, I have some more cds to get through😉
I built Carlos OPA627 buffer last night to try, I used the OPA627BP, I have been using Pedja's 2sk170 discrete since I built the amp with excellent results.
Both ciruits are built point 2 point on plain veroboard, no exotic capacitors etc are used.
I ran it from the same psu's I used for the discrete buffer.
It had been running for about 20 minutes and my initial impression was good, the bass is very deep but seemed a bit slow, mids was very nice and vocals sounded very emmotional on some tracks but lacked a little air.
I decided to stick my test and burn cd on repeat and leave the amp running all night into a dummy load and try it again when I finished work.
I have been listening to it again now, the first thing that is obvious is the bass😱 , especially the low notes on piano, incredible, its so much better than what I heard last night, also vocals have improved and now sound very focused, everything sounds better placed and the mids more free, the thing sounds so enjoyable its hard to pull yourself away.
Both Carlos and Pedja's buffers are excellent and are certainly worth building (please give them time to burn in especially the opa627 circuit), I also tried the amp in inverting and non inverting with and without buffers.
In my opinion buffer/ inverted easily sounds the best, the amp just sounds more musical.
Next thing I want to try is Pedja's discrete regulator circuit, has anybody else compared this against the Lm338T?
Leon
I agree with you, millwood.
I don't have the tools, the gift, the patience, and conditions to make nice looking boxes.
I wish I had.
But I think layout is very important, not just the parts that are used.
Internal layout on my amp may not look so nice and appealing, but everything is made with a purpose.
I agree with you again that we MUST NOT trust everything we see on the net, there are very bad things floating around, and people saying it's hi-fi nirvana.
As I don't have any commercial interests here, I just opened this thread to report my experiences with (chip)amp topology and regulated PSUs. I hope I didn't make a mistake...
Take it as you want, believe, don't believe, but I must agree with Nuuk: someone must be deaf or something's wrong with the system or whatever if you listen to this and say it's not better than the typical Gaincard-copy-paste amps.
No need to A-B testing here.
It's clear as water.
Note: I have very few opened threads here.
I only called two of them "High-End...", and I mean it.😉
I report when I think it's worth, when I think it's good.
I don't have time, money, patience to loose with things if it's not to make something better, and always better.
I don't stick to a basic circuit, I always try to better it, and I have my own ideas.
You don't know me personally, this is the internet, believe, don't believe?
Up to you.😎
I don't have the tools, the gift, the patience, and conditions to make nice looking boxes.
I wish I had.
But I think layout is very important, not just the parts that are used.
Internal layout on my amp may not look so nice and appealing, but everything is made with a purpose.
I agree with you again that we MUST NOT trust everything we see on the net, there are very bad things floating around, and people saying it's hi-fi nirvana.
As I don't have any commercial interests here, I just opened this thread to report my experiences with (chip)amp topology and regulated PSUs. I hope I didn't make a mistake...
Take it as you want, believe, don't believe, but I must agree with Nuuk: someone must be deaf or something's wrong with the system or whatever if you listen to this and say it's not better than the typical Gaincard-copy-paste amps.
No need to A-B testing here.
It's clear as water.
Note: I have very few opened threads here.
I only called two of them "High-End...", and I mean it.😉
I report when I think it's worth, when I think it's good.
I don't have time, money, patience to loose with things if it's not to make something better, and always better.
I don't stick to a basic circuit, I always try to better it, and I have my own ideas.
You don't know me personally, this is the internet, believe, don't believe?
Up to you.😎
Welcome Leon,
Let it
and , those electolythic caps need to be "formated", bypassing of the OPA627 is the key.😀
Advice to all:
Never judge definitely an amp on the first week.
Let it .
😎
Let it
and , those electolythic caps need to be "formated", bypassing of the OPA627 is the key.😀 Advice to all:
Never judge definitely an amp on the first week.
Let it
.😎
I guess you are aware that the combination of these two can fool you quite heavily in a way that it´s your ears that burn in rather than your amp.Never judge definitely an amp on the first week.
Let it
I always use to say : the worse the amp the longer it will need to to burn in.😉
joensd said:
I don't know what you're trying to say, but I can assure you that nobody here can tell me how to evaluate a system.
You are right, some people don't know how to listen.
These things you learn, and it takes a long time.
Anyway, I didn't mod my amps, I made a new one.
I could compare several amps.
joensd said:
That's empyrical.😀
That is one thing to say and not to prove.
Anyway, forget it, the amp is crap.
Good night.
Another dangerous assumption is that a theory is 100% correct or 100% wrong. Often the truth lies somewhere in between! 😉
I agree with Joensd that sometimes we can dislike a bad piece of equipment less because we get used to it. But it is also true that good hi-fi gets better as it burns in.
Carlos, I was getting a high-pitched buzzing from my tweeters after a while so I have removed the buffers for now. The hum is virtually gone (even without your mod although I will try it anyway).
I suspect that I may have oscillations in the buffer section but can check that out by trying my original buffers. (These days I have to wade through Gainclone parts all around my house. .😱
Even without the buffer, the sound is still much better than with a non-regulated IGC. 😉
I agree with Joensd that sometimes we can dislike a bad piece of equipment less because we get used to it. But it is also true that good hi-fi gets better as it burns in.
Carlos, I was getting a high-pitched buzzing from my tweeters after a while so I have removed the buffers for now. The hum is virtually gone (even without your mod although I will try it anyway).
I suspect that I may have oscillations in the buffer section but can check that out by trying my original buffers. (These days I have to wade through Gainclone parts all around my house. .😱
Even without the buffer, the sound is still much better than with a non-regulated IGC. 😉
Observing new developments in this thread, I did some more listening today and I stand behind what I said before.
Comparing to battery powered Patek, H-E RBI GC does not have resolution in highs. In my system the highs seem to etched and "processed", somewhat disjointed from the midrange. Since there is not enough high frequency resolution, midrange is prominent.
The feeling of life perfomance is somehow lost, and the presentation is a bit lifeless.
I don't see whatsoever any superiority in a bottom end. The bass is slightly boomy, but is not deep enough and lacks both resolution and the impact.
If you call it 'high-end', let it be high end, but there is definitely nothing wrong with my ears or my system, and it's ain't no China, millwood.
Comparing to battery powered Patek, H-E RBI GC does not have resolution in highs. In my system the highs seem to etched and "processed", somewhat disjointed from the midrange. Since there is not enough high frequency resolution, midrange is prominent.
The feeling of life perfomance is somehow lost, and the presentation is a bit lifeless.
I don't see whatsoever any superiority in a bottom end. The bass is slightly boomy, but is not deep enough and lacks both resolution and the impact.
If you call it 'high-end', let it be high end, but there is definitely nothing wrong with my ears or my system, and it's ain't no China, millwood.
Nuuk said:
For those open to non-dogmatic possibilities it is reasonable that some parts could burn in and ears burn in as well.
I have heard the notion numerous times that if you add a "bump" in the frequency response, have humans listen to it over a period of time and then set the frequncy flat, it will then sound like there is a frequency drop out.
Seems reasonable since your eyes do the same thing on a shorter time scale. Ever look at say a red object for a few minutes and then look at a white piece of paper and you see it as blueish? This is just the way our perception system works as it is trying to calibrate against the sensors and no amount of insisting that we know how to see properly will overcome it.
In the end it is an individuals satisfaction with their system that counts no matter how the perception came about. So how they got there, part burn in, ear burn in etc. is not really inportant if they are satisfied.
If the goal is though to make a mass generalization then there needs to be many data points with many ears hearing it fresh for it to be much more than conjecture. Not that conjecture is bad but it is really advancing a hypothesis. The individual data point is a fact (what a person percieves) but the generalization is really a theory.
If the goal is to say "x" is always better than "y" then you need an infinite number of ears.
If the goal is to say that it is a likely bet that "x" is better than "y" in a particular configuration (and YMMV) then a goodly number of data points helps or a good theoretical underpinning. This "better bet" should not be confused with "I know this is always better because I tried a lot of possibilities with my configuration and my set of speakers so I know how it works in every case".
I don't find it odd at all that pPeter finds his combination to sound better to him in his set up and Carlosfm likes the way his sounds in his set up. I imagine if we all sat down to listen to either system we would think they both sounded great, would enjoy really fine music reproduction and have a great time.
Our mileage will vary. I think there are many roads to Nirvana.
Hi there,
I have been thinking about my next project and was looking at making a little preamp. I have built a Constant current, constant voltage valve preamp (based on Joes Valve buffer) and am happy with the results. However I have been told that the jfet buffer sounds better. I am also tempted by the OPA buffer, because it seems simpler to implement, I can get the chips as samples and it is likely to be smaller (with power supply). Can someone help me make up my mind by telling me if the OPA buffer is definately superior to the Jfet buffer.
I know this is a subjective opinion but thats exactly what I want.
Thanks
Shoog
I have been thinking about my next project and was looking at making a little preamp. I have built a Constant current, constant voltage valve preamp (based on Joes Valve buffer) and am happy with the results. However I have been told that the jfet buffer sounds better. I am also tempted by the OPA buffer, because it seems simpler to implement, I can get the chips as samples and it is likely to be smaller (with power supply). Can someone help me make up my mind by telling me if the OPA buffer is definately superior to the Jfet buffer.
I know this is a subjective opinion but thats exactly what I want.
Thanks
Shoog
I don't think that regulated PS is the same thing as a big cap, and what I observed so far, the results are promising. It's just that the implementation of the amp I've built recently is not up to the task. But regulated supply can be good.
But don't think it's as easy as putting some parts together. It needs quite a lot of tweaking and tuning to get the best out of it.
But don't think it's as easy as putting some parts together. It needs quite a lot of tweaking and tuning to get the best out of it.
Not a very fair comparison 🙂 Batteries to a crappy 3-terminal, very funny. The 3-terminals manage to provide sonic benefits mostly in the bass and timing at the expense of everything else. This is of course IMHO and outside the GC context, although i'd be very surprised if they sounded dramatically better there. A nice open loop regulator may bring completely different results.
I have noticed that the perception of high quality bass is intricately related to the abilities at much higher frequencies ,which may explain Peter's disappointment.
Carlos, otoh, seems to have a preference for smoothness rather than dynamics or excitement. His fondness of the 627 and buffers also points in the same direction. So, possibly both opinions are correct in their respective contexts 🙂
millwood said:
To put what Frank was saying in less colourful language (now in Texas), a properly done regulated power supply will have a much lower impedance with more bandwidth than a big cap ... they are not the same beast at all.
dave
Peter Daniel said:
I hope this isn't too much exercise but think about what an infinittely large cap will do, and what a perfect regulator will do, from the load's perspective.
comparing apples and pickles...
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=427029#post427029
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=427052&highlight=nichicon#post427052
and your caveat was most appreciated.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=420480#post420480
I'd like to add that I really appreciate the consistent sincerity and intellectual rigor you bring to these discussions, which make them so tremendously informative.
Well said. Which is why I found you posting on this same thread -Peter Daniel said:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=427029#post427029
very interesting and helpful. An hour later you continued that evaluation -Peter Daniel said:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=427052&highlight=nichicon#post427052
and your caveat was most appreciated.
Ya think? Given your evaluation of the Muse caps from a few months ago, I find your later comments on Carlos's topology to be quite consistent -Peter Daniel said:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=420480#post420480
with your previous stated views on the Nichicon caps.Peter Daniel said:
I'd like to add that I really appreciate the consistent sincerity and intellectual rigor you bring to these discussions, which make them so tremendously informative.
Consistent it is indeed.
Seeing your effort with finding appropriate quatations, I still don't get your point though.
Seeing your effort with finding appropriate quatations, I still don't get your point though.
Hi,
I couldn't agree more....
This material is far too complex to be the subject of blanket statements.
Would it be possible to have Analog_sa's post inserted again?
TA
Cheers,😉
I couldn't agree more....
This material is far too complex to be the subject of blanket statements.
Would it be possible to have Analog_sa's post inserted again?
TA
Cheers,😉
- Status
- Not open for further replies.