Diamond buffer (which BUF 634 is) can drive notably heavy loads so if you buffer the IGC with it, you can use 22k/1k or 22k/680R (or even lower values) feedback network for the inverted GC.tbla said:
Pedja
And what does it say?
No, stop, this wasn't meant another thread like "How many words do you hear from track 2 of BUF634 heavy music?", so don't reply
No, stop, this wasn't meant another thread like "How many words do you hear from track 2 of BUF634 heavy music?", so don't reply
I think it is time to actually do a controlled, like for like test of this, meaning matched gains, identical components etc., as we have plenty "Apples & Pears" comparisons which are unlikely ever to have been level matched.
I suggest I'll build a "gainclone" using a circuit that offers a "semi-balanced" input with XLR's as jacks. This will be driven by a TVC based linestage and the Ack!dAck.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am game, but would propose the simplest of topography, and driven by a resistor based passive of which I have several. I am in central London.
How are you going to use identical components when the NI is direct coupled and the INV has a coupling cap?
I suggest I'll build a "gainclone" using a circuit that offers a "semi-balanced" input with XLR's as jacks. This will be driven by a TVC based linestage and the Ack!dAck.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am game, but would propose the simplest of topography, and driven by a resistor based passive of which I have several. I am in central London.
How are you going to use identical components when the NI is direct coupled and the INV has a coupling cap?
I'm All ears!
If this ABX comes to fruition, I would like to be considered. I have no audiophile kit (but some great ARCAM stuff!!). I am not an audiophile, or a classical musician, but I *do* have an ear for music! If this "listen-in" is in the new year, then I would be honoured to come to town.
Alll the best
Jon
If this ABX comes to fruition, I would like to be considered. I have no audiophile kit (but some great ARCAM stuff!!). I am not an audiophile, or a classical musician, but I *do* have an ear for music! If this "listen-in" is in the new year, then I would be honoured to come to town.
Alll the best
Jon
D soundz of d buffer
Hmm… yes, I know. 😉 Actually it was just a few days ago when I listened to my AD844 common base I/V with and without its output buffer (again it is diamond). And yes, though it is not night and day, there is the difference. Without it the acoustic instruments have more natural colors, but with it the dynamics is better and the bass is deeper and this applies to all recording types I listened to. So that is with and without it. I liked it more with. Just please don’t tell me you like it simple, I like it simple too! And all this happened at the 100kOhm load. Hmm, what will happen on the 10k load? I’ll check this buffer very soon in the discrete implementation as a front end for the IGC.
How's your buffer project?
Pedja
Peter Daniel said:
Hmm… yes, I know. 😉 Actually it was just a few days ago when I listened to my AD844 common base I/V with and without its output buffer (again it is diamond). And yes, though it is not night and day, there is the difference. Without it the acoustic instruments have more natural colors, but with it the dynamics is better and the bass is deeper and this applies to all recording types I listened to. So that is with and without it. I liked it more with. Just please don’t tell me you like it simple, I like it simple too! And all this happened at the 100kOhm load. Hmm, what will happen on the 10k load? I’ll check this buffer very soon in the discrete implementation as a front end for the IGC.
How's your buffer project?
Pedja
I'm working on it right now. If the parts form digi key come in tomorrow, I will have done tomorrow. I'm very curious about results.
Keeping things simple is OK, but it seems that simplicity is not the best solution, sometimes.
Keeping things simple is OK, but it seems that simplicity is not the best solution, sometimes.
Make things as simple as they can be, but not to simple-Albert Einstien.
ron
Quote from my old ME prof"the hardest thing you can do is to make something simple"
ron
Quote from my old ME prof"the hardest thing you can do is to make something simple"
This reminds me of my days back-packing around our lovely planet!
You could always tell the newbies who would have huge bulging backpacks, carrying far more than they would ever need.
The next stage was the 'I'm not a newbie' syndrome where people carried next to nothing in order to differentiate themselves from the newbies. Of course, they managed to do this as they scrounged off other backpackers.
The really experienced backpackers carried neither too much nor too little!
You could always tell the newbies who would have huge bulging backpacks, carrying far more than they would ever need.
The next stage was the 'I'm not a newbie' syndrome where people carried next to nothing in order to differentiate themselves from the newbies. Of course, they managed to do this as they scrounged off other backpackers.
The really experienced backpackers carried neither too much nor too little!
Minimalism in itself is a pointless exercise, though making the very best of as little as possible is not.
Re: Re: Inverted vs. Non Inverted
Konnichiwa,
Which is what I will do.
Why bother? TVC is vastly superior AND allows for the simple switchover of mode as described due to balanced output.
I am going to use EXACTLY the same Amplifier, the only change being the grounding of either one or the other input (signal) side of the pseudo balanced input. Doing this keeps ALL parts, values, gain, polarity etc the same with straight and noiseless switching using a simple "center neutral" DPDT toggle switch.
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
fmak said:
Which is what I will do.
fmak said:
Why bother? TVC is vastly superior AND allows for the simple switchover of mode as described due to balanced output.
fmak said:
I am going to use EXACTLY the same Amplifier, the only change being the grounding of either one or the other input (signal) side of the pseudo balanced input. Doing this keeps ALL parts, values, gain, polarity etc the same with straight and noiseless switching using a simple "center neutral" DPDT toggle switch.
Sayonara
The amps will sound different when driven by resistor based passive and TVC. IMO, TVC extracts all the best from those amps, while reistor based passive is more neutral, but not always appreciated.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Inverted vs. Non Inverted
Konnichiwa,
Well, that would mean "not in my system". And I'm not making a "Demo" amp, I would merely build my "spare" amp (which is in the offing for a long time)
And I am not (any longer) fond of resistive attenuators, as their own sonic coloration (arguably mostly subtractive) detract.
At any extent, using ANY other methode removes the "level playing field" unless we add a 1:1 balancing transformer into the mix (again).
I agree that simplification is best, in which case a TVC is best.
Nor can I, probably new year....
Sayonara
Konnichiwa,
fmak said:
Well, that would mean "not in my system". And I'm not making a "Demo" amp, I would merely build my "spare" amp (which is in the offing for a long time)
fmak said:
And I am not (any longer) fond of resistive attenuators, as their own sonic coloration (arguably mostly subtractive) detract.
At any extent, using ANY other methode removes the "level playing field" unless we add a 1:1 balancing transformer into the mix (again).
fmak said:
I agree that simplification is best, in which case a TVC is best.
fmak said:
Nor can I, probably new year....
Sayonara
- Status
- Not open for further replies.