I don't forget. Speakers are complex but we don't know little about them at all.
Toole, Olive, Linkwitz and others have done a lot of work in correlating measurements with what we perceive, this is where the serious work is in psychoacoustics, not DACs
Oh my Professeur, don't let them influence your manners and choice of vocabulary. A learned gentleman avoids using less than civilized words.
On the contrary, I find his choice of vocabulary very tasteful.
Too bad I can't find the posting where he was accused of using the word "taliban". Mind you, from my side, it's not a judgement, even less a condemnation, I'm just curious whether it would trigger an automated or human sanitizer or something. In a previous non-audio life, we did use this qualifier to some very obtuse "customers", but we never dared putting it in writing.
The classic Luxman L100, one of the best sounding integrated amps I have owned has the output inductors on the protection board, not the amp boards:
Ya learn something every day...of course Luxman may have just run out of space on those little amp boards...
Cheers!
Howie
You probably haven't got a clue, you mean
Minelab was acquired by Codan (Military comms etc) in 2008. Halcro sales
would have been minuscule compared to the metal detector business. Halcro
was shelved.
The brand name has since been bought along with all patents, tooling etc by Longwood
Audio. Some of the original team remain and they are making new product under Halcro name.
On Ya Ozzie's!
T
Last edited:
You probably haven't got a clue, you mean
T
You may be happy that you have.
Exactly right. ToS has discovered when almost everyone is on his ignore list he can't follow any discussion.
Ahem, my ‘To Ignore’ list has been a worthwhile experiment in trying to figure out where I belong. I certainly do not belong here in the ‘Game of High End Audio’ where nobody can ever agree on how to conduct a meaningful and productive debate.
Except for RN Marsh - a real electronics engineer who measures everything, including his own words. His knowledge is breathtaking, he speaks, I listen. And Tournesol, because he is an erudite passionate dude and a proper gentleman.
As for you Scott .......
ToS
When you design, manufacture and promote the ultimate performance amplifier, and make a brand out of it's performance, there is nowhere else to go after the initial market segment is exhausted. You can't do a cheaper amp with worse performance, since it would go against your own brand, and since you already positioned yourself in the "price no objection" segment, the new lower price point would be irrelevant.
So I guess Bruce Candy was not even hoping for a market survival time span longer than what he already got. He built it, made some money out of it, then shelved it, moved forward, end of story. I see though the new brand owners Magenta/Longwood Audio are trying to revive the brand with an AUD 135,000/pair mono amplifier (no final spec available yet, but preliminary better than the DM88), good luck.
Last edited:
IIRC Phase Linear amps had coil and ceramic shunt cap mounted to output connectors.
Coil good, ceramic cap bad.
Dan.
The DM88 did measure well though Halcro dm88 Reference monoblock power amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com
If you have PS return paths sharing signal return paths, you have other design problems that should be addressed
The mitigation of system ground loops was one possible advantage but many here wouldn't concede that batteries/supercaps were lower noise than LDOs until the measurements were presented - now the back-peddling is evident
Last edited:
Please, try to read what follow with tenderness: I open my heart on very fragile and sensitive things.
Each time I put a microphone in front of an instrument, I stop to believe in transparency. Whatever I try. (And i tried a lot ;-)
For me, it is like photography, an other "art" I like to practice.
A glass can be, more or less transparent, a photography, never. Try to photography a sunset with the best digital modern camera you can find. See what I mean ?
Apart some "pure electronic" music records, in the Kraftwerk tradition, there is very few records that do not contain natural sounds. Voices, drums, horns, acoustic and even electric guitars (Yes we know how a Gibson or a Fender is supposed to sound). In fact, in studios, there is not misunderstandings about that between musicians, sound engineers, producers. We have no problem to share very subtle sound impressions, working together.
In both situations, the goal is to create the illusion. And the way we do-it is everything but "linear".
The difference between classical music and modern music (Jazz etc.) is:
- On a creative point of view, while classical records offer just another 'interpretation' of the same statuary composers scores, and make believe it comes from a concert hall, the 'modern music' studio work is the creation of the score, the interpretation and the 'sound' all in once.
So, most of the time, the record is the original artwork, that musician on tour try to reproduce (more or less, because they like to stay creative at each moment of their lives).
Well, as I have copies of some original masters I did, I'm, may-be in a little more better situation to judge ifsome damage has been done, by mastering engineers as an example ;-) to the final product. I say "a little", because, memory ... ?
Well, to return to our sheep, for every piece of audio gear that is dedicated to transport information, It seems logical to lie on the less deterioration of the signal as possible.IE, lowest distortions, added noise etc. But, each time we change of universe (acoustic to electric and the opposite), and even analog to digital, it is an other story.
Well, let's take an exemple, ADC and DACs. I love digital, because it was the technology that was less destructive in studios, where we constantly compare inputs/outputs. But how to ensure there were not an RIAA in between. See what I mean ?
I have the feeling that the last ADC i bought were adding extra definition or sharpness (call this how you like) that I never noticed before. But i'm blind about this. My memory, the progres of the amplifiers and speakers in between, the changes of my ears with age etc.
That why I try to have confirmation of this feeling, reading others sharing their own *subjective* feelings and not believe in numbers more than this.
it is the contrary of an anti-scientific demarch. First validate observation, then try to understand the causes of the observed effects. Then to try to find a way to measure , objectively, those effects. Last the effective technical way to address them.
But I know for granted that we are far, oh Lord, far away to can measure all what we hear. We just, for the moment, measure with a great precision, a little part of the effects in actions.
This has earned me to be definitely classified by some here in the clan of what they imagine to be a subjectivist audiophile, while my approach is exactly opposite. In fact I had spend, exactly like many of us here, long long hours in my life in measurements. Just I try endlessly to correlate them with my subjective listening impressions. With not a lot of success.
When it is for my own use, no problem, my own pleasure is the target. When it is for others (in a R&D office), the big question remain: What others will hear ? And where is the best balance between soft and harsh, blur and fatigue. And where to look for those defects to avoid searching in the dark.
Last edited:
I don't think anyone has done that, it would be foolish of them since you are continually proclaiming not to be.
And it would certainly help if everybody would stop using the words:- ‘objective, subjective, and audiophile’ - plus all their derivatives.
Naturally, I include myself in this abstention ..... if only to block the opportunity of a snark from you - Scott
Wow! Your neighbour must have an intelligent cat.
Not really, it is a remarkably stupid animal.
Good of you to admit making a trollish commentif only to block the opportunity of a snark from you - Scott
You can blind your eyes looking at the sun through the glass, but no such problem looking at the photograph of the sun. No contest.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.