Then this would be coming out of both ends, while simultaneously being reinserted into the other end of each, until one cannot be differentiated from the other?
YouTube
We should assemble a care package for the stereophile folks.
It's all clear to me now the issue is their lack of quality reference recordings.
I would agree, those are sports sedans. Technically a sports car should only have 2 seats. Even the 911 is more a GT car these days, excepting the GT3 maybe.
I'll stop the car talk now. 😉
The word is 'eclectic' 🙂
I've been introduced to some great stuff by Scott, and some that is best left only listened to once 😀
I've been introduced to some great stuff by Scott, and some that is best left only listened to once 😀
In explore all forms of "tribal" music so I know a lot of unusual stuff, these posts are more my comment on how interesting I find the car talk and adolescent locker room banter.
Fluid piano - excellent You might like this YouTube
Last edited:
I know 😉 I think it was a piece of film I saw of Pete Seeger talking about folk music from around the world, he used Frere Jacques, I believe, as an example of how with a few minimal changes you could see the similarities between folk music worldwide.
Well, some of us have to work (in audio design) for a living, and I am getting awfully busy. I have all kinds of prototypes coming my way, as well as new designs. Amps, preamps, phono stages, they are all on the table (my test table) and I hope to make each an every one the best that it can be. This takes more than just measurements. It also requires listening, and even intuition developed over 50 years of design.
On other subjects, I don't mind cars or a lot of stuff, I just mind insulting the thread with scat, and bad mouthing of new ideas.
On other subjects, I don't mind cars or a lot of stuff, I just mind insulting the thread with scat, and bad mouthing of new ideas.
Bybees have been around for how long? Innovation in analog audio electronics has long been making better and better class D. The rest of the field is just rehashing things with new components, at best. Audio dacs/adcs have even generally stalled out since they're better than the whole recording chain by loads anyhow. I
That is definately as much a visual as aural experience. Brilliant and bonkers.
Of course the odd bit about the locker room banter is that several of those involved are 3x the age of the other. Yet the youngun is the one based in reality.
DPH it is obvious that you don't follow such things as Bybee, or even the latest analog designs. That is OK for you, but I have to make better audio products than I have made previously, and compete with other master audio designers in the marketplace. I would rather do this than to 'retire'.
Now that I have made so many power amps, etc, should I not know by now just what to do? Well, I don't, because subjective feedback tells me that I could do better, because my competition is sometimes preferred over my Parasound designs, yet several of these are fairly expensive and the best that I could do within the constraints of having the designs manufacturered offshore. My only real successes so far are the Vendetta Research SCP-2 phono stage and the CTC Blowtorch preamplifier, and they are not being made anymore. Everything else can stand improvement, IF I can only determine what is needed to improve! Measurements are already adequate, TIM is not a problem, BUT maybe PIM, or something else? I hope to find out.
Class D has been with us for more than 50 years as well. It has virtually taken over motor drives, (I used to design linear motor drives at Ampex in the 1960's) etc. but I would not generally recommend it for anything except woofers at this time. Class A tubes and linear fet circuits are what I still find best for mid to hi frequency sound reproduction.
I have been working on a hybrid linear amp with tracking switching power supplies for several years now, but I find it less than the best so far. My co-designer has found several upgrades, so I hope that he will modify the unit that I am listening to in my office, and make it better.
We shall see, as it has so much potential, sort of the best of both worlds.
Class D has been with us for more than 50 years as well. It has virtually taken over motor drives, (I used to design linear motor drives at Ampex in the 1960's) etc. but I would not generally recommend it for anything except woofers at this time. Class A tubes and linear fet circuits are what I still find best for mid to hi frequency sound reproduction.
I have been working on a hybrid linear amp with tracking switching power supplies for several years now, but I find it less than the best so far. My co-designer has found several upgrades, so I hope that he will modify the unit that I am listening to in my office, and make it better.
We shall see, as it has so much potential, sort of the best of both worlds.
Last edited:
Stephen Scott's earliest stuff has fewer participants and is a little Philip Glass like at times.
John, you're right, I haven't kept up with "high end" audio too much at all. There's only so many variations of a Lin-based opamp-on-steroids that I can take before it all looks the same. Yes, class-D has been around for a long time, but this is one place where we're seeing the greatest improvements in design (that might have a positive effect audibly).
As far as any innovation in the world of Bybees, a "new" material based on junk science and measured to have essentially no effect is still junk science measured to have essentially no effect. (The essentially based on whatever resistor thingamagig there was/is going around, which obviously behaves like a resistor. I've forgotten the details).
Plenty to be learned in making speakers work better, especially in the rooms they occupy (and oftentimes smashed up against walls to satisfy the spouse, etc), but that's hardly another Lin-based opamp-on-steroids.
As far as any innovation in the world of Bybees, a "new" material based on junk science and measured to have essentially no effect is still junk science measured to have essentially no effect. (The essentially based on whatever resistor thingamagig there was/is going around, which obviously behaves like a resistor. I've forgotten the details).
Plenty to be learned in making speakers work better, especially in the rooms they occupy (and oftentimes smashed up against walls to satisfy the spouse, etc), but that's hardly another Lin-based opamp-on-steroids.
The Lin circuit, advanced for its day, just like a '34 Ford engine was in its day, is only superficially related to today's designs. In fact, we were using Lin based designs back in 1968 in the Ampex audio department, when I originally developed the complementary differential input stage. The audio department rejected the com-diff design as too complex, and stayed with the Lin based design, but I built one for myself and have never gone back to capacitor connected, quasi-comp single ended driver designs.
I had not thought to do that... I have tough skin.... or would have long ago. There are some good guys that have been banned for life who said much much less than this guy called waly. I will do so from now on..... better than blocking him from my screen.
THx for the reminder....
RNM
I re-read it and fully understood this bit of the Putzeys balanced preamp article.
"Long story short. Instead of operating as an attenuator, the potentiometer is used as the sole feedback element in an inverting amplifier. Linearity of the volume control now only hinges on the linearity of the divider ratio. This is almost guaranteed in linear pots. The track resistance can be very very nonlinear before this becomes an issue."
What he means is that despite the slight non-linearity of the track R (resistance will change as a function of current flow), the divider ratio doesn´t change in this particular circuit, because the current is the same through both portions of the track that constitute the resistive divider (there is no current or very little through the wiper, microamps or less).
In other words, there is a slight variation in total track resistance with signal, but this R variation does not affect the programmed gain. Divider ratio is constant with signal. No trace of compression or expansion (which one is it with a carbon track?) with large excursions.
All of this is valid for a linear track. Don´t use log or you will completely muck up the goodness of the circuit!
"Long story short. Instead of operating as an attenuator, the potentiometer is used as the sole feedback element in an inverting amplifier. Linearity of the volume control now only hinges on the linearity of the divider ratio. This is almost guaranteed in linear pots. The track resistance can be very very nonlinear before this becomes an issue."
What he means is that despite the slight non-linearity of the track R (resistance will change as a function of current flow), the divider ratio doesn´t change in this particular circuit, because the current is the same through both portions of the track that constitute the resistive divider (there is no current or very little through the wiper, microamps or less).
In other words, there is a slight variation in total track resistance with signal, but this R variation does not affect the programmed gain. Divider ratio is constant with signal. No trace of compression or expansion (which one is it with a carbon track?) with large excursions.
All of this is valid for a linear track. Don´t use log or you will completely muck up the goodness of the circuit!
Attachments
The original Baxandall Active Volume Control is described here: http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tidu034/tidu034.pdf
Last edited:
What follows is that using switched resistors instead of the pot is NOT an improvement in this circuit! 🙂
The reason for the switched resistors wasn't for better sound, but for better (perceived or real) ease of use.
In the original circuit, turning the pot to one extreme moves the gain towards infinity. Could be scary ;-)
The switched thing lets you avoid that.
OTOH, I am using one of these preamps with the linear dual pot for more than a year now and never had any user issues. At some point it is loud enough and that is it. But I don't have any small kids running around either.
Jan
In the original circuit, turning the pot to one extreme moves the gain towards infinity. Could be scary ;-)
The switched thing lets you avoid that.
OTOH, I am using one of these preamps with the linear dual pot for more than a year now and never had any user issues. At some point it is loud enough and that is it. But I don't have any small kids running around either.
Jan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.