If great sounding amps can be built with so few parts, why are most commercial offerings so complex?

Jump to Latest
#41
DamonB said:
I ask in all sincerity: If something like a Firstwatt amp can be built with such high sound quality and so few parts, why are most commercial offerings from all eras so complex in parts count? I understand manufacturing (my profession) and that in the end viable commercial solutions come down to dollars and cents along with being reliable and stupid proof (that alone takes time, energy and resources! A LOT of money goes into stupid proof!). In general, the more parts the higher the cost in both acquiring those parts and labor to install them; unless those more numerous parts are so insanely cheap they can do the job of fewer more expensive parts. Or perhaps those numerous parts make the product more universal to all markets so money is saved by having a single highly numerous product as opposed to variants in a smaller number. Or perhaps something else altogether?

When you pull the covers off most audio components, especially anything that is not "esoteric", you're staring at MANY devices whether they be passive or microchips. That said, what am I overlooking?
Click to expand...
You should understand what a Firstwatt amp is and is not.
A Firstwatt amp produces an enjoyable sound with efficient speakers at a rational sound level in a small room.
It does not produce high power (250Watts+) for 80dB speakers nor strong transient sounds. You cannot use a 30W amp to power a band PA system.
It does not produce PPM (part-per-million) super low distortion. Most "audiophiles" will not be happy with the distortion of a First Watt amp.

This reminds me of the market for Harley Davidson motorbikes. People love their Harleys, but you will not win any races with them, and you will get wet if you travel in the rain. Other people want an SUV or a Tesla, or "ricer rocket" motorcycle. Each product has its fans for different priorities.
 
#42
DamonB said:
We started acquiring vinyl in the past year or so
Click to expand...
Quite a few UK charity shops have old vinyl now - perhaps some rich pickings there?
Incidentally, the old 78s can be HiFi too, with the correct gear.
Also DVDs LOL, £1 for 10 I'm finding - cheaper than netflix, and more varied 🙂

Referencing the thread title: when re-capping the pre-amp of my old Sony F6B, I observed that the vast majority of the electronics was for the phono input 😀

I should probably play more vinyl just to prevent it sitting idle !!
 
#44
analog_sa said:
Low power amps never worked for me.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean, a powerful amplifier at low volume should be the same..
.. but it isn't.

Why? My unfashionable reason is 'Too much reliance on GNFB' 😀
If an amplifier doesn't know it's small, then it can sound just like a big amplifier - in my experience.

I have a GU50 SE tube amplifier I modded, using the Thorston Loesch (IIRC) idea of not putting the OPT into the GNFB loop. His reasons were logical: The gain of a tube amp past the OPT is lousy at the extreme treble and bass - but that's the bit that needs the most feedback!! By bypassing this laggy 'filter', the feeback could just work on the power tube and driver tubes - very fast - and simply drive the primary well, leaving the secondary to it's own devices.

So anyway I agreed that this was logical, so I modded my amplifier, and he was correct, it sounded much better. But the best aspect is that it now sounds effortless, even when quite loud. It doesn't seem to know it's a small SE tube amp 😀
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9050lx and batteryman
#47
CharlieLaub said:
Oh the irony of this user posting this question while his profile sports a Ferrari badge!
Click to expand...
It's not ironic at all. My question revolves around costs. I didn't mention sound quality or any other "arguable" topic.

I'd be the first to agree that a Honda makes 1000% more sense as a means of transportation for going to work and the grocery store. But that's not why people buy Ferraris... There are certainly parallels in the audiophile world but that is never where my question was headed.
 
#49
stv said:
Because there are no commercially available high quality fullrange speakers!
(At least I don't know any!)
Click to expand...
It's the opposite.

Current drive allows for the use of fullrange drivers without copper / Faraday ring on the pole piece.

With current drive such a nice driver like Pioneer

TS-G1310F​

sounds very high end.

TS-G1310F_3.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Globulator
#51
Freedom666 said:
With current drive such a nice driver like Pioneer

TS-G1310F​

sounds very high end.
Click to expand...
Interesting, I'm a big fan of whizzer cone drivers. I have a couple of old 4"(ish) Kenwood paper whizzers with quite big magnets, from an old 1980s BMW that would be a nice project.

I've had excellent sound from 13cm pioneers that look very similar to that, one I used in a tiny 'Gorilla' guitar amp when it's voice coil decided to unstick itself from the former - also sounded excellent.

Whizzer is an example of simplicity with top quality.
The most realistic midrange I ever heard - to a spooky degree - as if the person talking was actually in the room - was from an old german tube table-top radio with a paper cone and I think an Alnico magnet. It was spookily good.

Current drive - very interesting idea. makes sense, electromagnets are current controlled devices. If you have a simple schematic - please post it up.
 
#52
The most realistic midrange I ever heard - to a spooky degree - as if the person talking was actually in the room - was from an old german tube table-top radio with a paper cone and I think an Alnico magnet. It was spookily good.

Ultralight paper voice coils, thin paper cones, etc. are excellent mid range reproducers.

To boot, "no crossover within the voice band" is very important for "naturality"

No problem with adding woofers and super tweeters to extend the range, if crossover problems are moved outside voice band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Freedom666
#58
JMFahey said:
Same here.
I see that with skill you can make a good performing simple design product, cool and kudos to the designer.

That said, you can start tweaking and tweaking and tweaking any design, correcting smaller and smaller problems with no end in sight.

Which of course will keep complicating it, typically with very small "improvements" every time.

Combine that with robotic automated production, you can easily make very complex stuff, for very low cost, so that is not a barrier any more.
Click to expand...

That’s a big factor with what I call the “people on staff phenomenon”.

You employ a few expensive EEs, you have to keep paying them, you don’t want to pay them to sit on their hands, so you give them the task of creating new products and “improving” existing products.
And so they do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMFahey and Globulator
#59
Nelson Pass said:
That's a problem for complicated circuits. I like simple stuff for a small list of reasons - you can easily imagine what those are, but in the end you will appreciate that I was exposed to Picasso at a young and impressionable age...

:snail:
Click to expand...
Hey Picasso, you ever think of trying your hand at designing an Xbox controller…simple would be welcome here.

IMG_5207.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 548798
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom