John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#49,282
john curl said:
To appreciate MC's compared to MM's, you have to try the two, AND you have to invest in the MC if you want a good one.
Click to expand...

I've done so. The best MMs were better, meaning "sound more like well-mastered digital transfers from master tapes." Hardly "muffled" or "laid back'; in fact, "slightly laid back" is how I'd describe most of the MCs I've heard, which tend to have a wide dip in the upper midrange (this was one reason that Gordon Holt didn't take to MCs) before rising again in the high treble or ultrasonic.

The main problem with high quality MMs is the criticality of loading, which is rarely done right- see my article in the latest LA for some illustrations. That puts the onus squarely on the preamp, and if it's designed by someone who regards MM as an afterthought, it will not likely do the job very well.
 
#49,285
jam said:
Something to chew on.

High Fidelity Cables
Click to expand...

LOL

"Lab Testing
A testing facility in Canada contracted by Magnetic Innovations LLC tried testing very low level signals, as low as -59 dB from a full signal strength of 2 volts. They discovered that long after conventional audio cables significantly obscured test signals, High Fidelity Cables were still at work clearly transferring this low level information. In controlled tests, a system wide reduction of 14% THD and 14% IMD was measured. Signal to noise ratio improved by 1.5 dB which is significant. This test was conducted by a third party in a controlled environment, using an RCA cable with Magnetic Conduction technology (these results will vary with different systems)."
 
#49,290
Someone here (who has the required equipment and magnetic material) needs to test this theory out.......after all it was awarded a patent.😕

Something like the Virtual Dynamics cables from several years ago.


Sorry SY I could not resist..........
 

Attachments

  • patent_pending.jpg
    patent_pending.jpg
    37.1 KB · Views: 246
Last edited:
#49,292
I think you have to give them +1 point for this statement:

"The test results appear to show a slight decrease in performance for the
signal cable using the magnet center-pin at the −10 dB signal level. There
was a slight increase in both THD and noise, plus a slight decrease in SNR.
The differences were between 0.4% and 3% of the total THD/noise, and the
SNR decreased by 0.26 dB"

😎
 
#49,293
It's always surprising how much new fundamental physics comes from audio interconnection wiring research. We're just wasting all the money we spend with the "straight" research labs. Need to turn these boys loose on Cancer or Alzheimers and the cure'd be found in a week.

Thanks,
Chris
 
#49,295
A well respected company, W.L. Gore, has a patent on using a magnetic alloy conductor for high speed cables. It is tuned to give a peak in the response at the target data rate. It really works but isn't simple to make. Or cheap to buy even in OEM quantities. However I have not tried a "focusing magnet" to see if it accelerates the data or sharpens the data focus.

I would think the cable from High Fidelity Cables would be a low pass filter with hysteresis. How audiophile.
 
#49,297
@ a.wayne
The tonearm is the Thales Simplicity form Micha Huber, the MC is the Silver Spirit form Blu Audio Systems. The arm is almost tangential ( negligible angle error) , the Spirit uses a Spheric tip with extrem low tip mass. The combo was choosen by listening and! because the arm / Mc resonance is around 8,7 Hz, so i have no more real problems with warped records and i suspect the frequency response exceeds that of any record i have . 😀

@brianco
My Phonostage is the FM Acoustics FM 222, its balanced, allows adjustment of resistive and capacitive loading and allows correct compensation of the RIAA Curve.
To my ears it it has pretty less sound of its own, but it cost two arms and two legs..

Generally the quadro stylus tip from Shibata was made with lowest possible mass to track the 38 Khz Carrier tone for the rear channels, but the trade in was much lower output level du the very long cantilver to keep the distorsions at acceptable levels, but very sensitive to cracks and dirt and dust...

MC or MM?
I prefer MC soundwise in the end, it can be influenced by mechanical parameters and damping and elctricallly by resistance to optimise it.
MMs are mainly dependent from electrical parameters to adjust the frequency response and Vinyl/tip resonance.

Grado's MI are not sensitive to cable capacity, but he uses multiple parts for the cantilever assembly to get the damping properties he wants and als put some elastic damping onto the cantilever.

Koetsu are still almost handmade, this explains the extreme tolerances.
No idea who makes it, Sugano San does not live any more and one of his many sons kept the company running. BTW , i have here a 9k Koetsu Platinum with broken cantilever, the damping rubber is like drop of dry oil, the armatures are rusty , so its just a showpiece.
The Stylus shape ( Big Secret) is something elliptip with low mass, and was built into the cantilver with a easy visible angle deviation from the cantilever, so is suspect the error is more then 2 degrees ....
 
#49,299
1audio said:
However I have not tried a "focusing magnet" to see if it accelerates the data or sharpens the data focus.
.
Click to expand...
Focusing magnets don't accelerate. Quads for example, will focus in one plane while defocus in the orthogonal plane. Sextupoles, well we all know about them..

A cable needs a pair of quads with a sextupole in the middle to keep the electrons together. If you use only one quad, the soundstage will go all flat on you. Unless it's a defocus quad, which will squeeze the soundstage but at least make it taller..:scratch:


Your right marce, this belongs in snake oil.
jn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom