Hey John,
I certainly recognize the need for improvement and applaud your efforts.
I don’t know if you remember my issues with a new halo integrated (original version) I ended sending it to a authorized service center for check out and it’s within spec......is there any upgrades possible in this unit?
If the weak point is in the pre amp would getting a quality pre and using the HT bypass for just the amp section help?
Maybe some of the safety switching can be bypassed?
Any thoughts would be appreciated,
Thanks,
Bob
Internal connectors....? So old school! One board and zero wiring is what has been the SOTA for at least 20 years grand-pa! Please point to a post that you think is typical for "that quality audio design is 'dead' and everything that matters is now taken into account"? I just don't see them?
//
//
Just look inside a Parasound amplifier, preamplifier, etc, and you will find internal connectors of marginal construction. They are sold today, as were similar models that were made 20years ago, and still discussed here. It is almost impossible to make a REPAIRABLE design without internal connectors. Yes, I am a grandpa, and hope, before I go, to be a great-grandpa!
Balanced out vs single ended are new features?
I've seen a 12 year old Onkyo HT preamp with both. Since this is diy audio forum, the inevitable question is, does it make audible difference in level matched listening comparison without peeking?
It's late here and I kept dozing off to it, something about his voice That sounds like a condemnation without examination. You haven't examined what audio system I've listened to and or what my hearing level is. I smell prejudice.
Another
.
Understood, massaging the same circuit topology for the last 40 years ("what works") obviously can't bring any improvement. No better circuit topology for audio applications was developed in the last 40 years, isn't it? Wait, make that 50 years, It was 40 years 10 years ago.
What I have found over the decades is that some of my circuit topologies that I developed even over 50 years ago, are now in engineering textbooks. It shows progress. I am still solving problems, the latest being how to combine the best of jfets and tubes to make a really nice 'hybrid' line amp. It is not as easy as it might appear.
I still search for a really good linear IC, one that can put my jfets to the test. Today, an associate found 2000 OP-42 IC's in his storage room. What can we do with them? I am told that they are pretty good sounding, better than most, and I know that their circuit topology was advanced in its time. (probably derived from a military IC made at Harris associates, back many decades ago, when dielectric isolation was necessary to make close complementary devices in IC's).
A really interesting book that I have been going through is: 'Analog IC design: the current mode approach' that goes back to 1990. Although most of the exotic topologies are not made for audio, they are interesting, nevertheless.
It's true that I continually return to the Blowtorch topology as my best effort, but other approaches look interesting too.
As linear circuit design is now not taught the way it was 50 years ago, I suspect that we will never have really better topologies for audio designed by younger designers.
I still search for a really good linear IC, one that can put my jfets to the test. Today, an associate found 2000 OP-42 IC's in his storage room. What can we do with them? I am told that they are pretty good sounding, better than most, and I know that their circuit topology was advanced in its time. (probably derived from a military IC made at Harris associates, back many decades ago, when dielectric isolation was necessary to make close complementary devices in IC's).
A really interesting book that I have been going through is: 'Analog IC design: the current mode approach' that goes back to 1990. Although most of the exotic topologies are not made for audio, they are interesting, nevertheless.
It's true that I continually return to the Blowtorch topology as my best effort, but other approaches look interesting too.
As linear circuit design is now not taught the way it was 50 years ago, I suspect that we will never have really better topologies for audio designed by younger designers.
Last edited:
I hear you John, I would love to see some new topologies to learn about..I am afraid a lot of audiophoolery is instead going toward stuff like this:
McIntosh MCLK12 McIntosh Meter Clock | Audio Advice
Geesh, I wish I had the kind of money that would make buying this seem rational...
Howie
McIntosh MCLK12 McIntosh Meter Clock | Audio Advice
Geesh, I wish I had the kind of money that would make buying this seem rational...
Howie
Keep them in a safe place, until they go out of production and become unobtanium. After that moment they will certainly sound wonderful.
Yes, lets see the in room frequency response at the listening spot of your audio setup. Then we can discuss more from there.
They should have added high fidelity tick tock and chimes sounds. That would have made for even happier dentists.
1980's, right? I am not sure that their circuit topology is so advanced. It is quite fast (50V/us), not very high GBW (10MHz), it has high noise (13nV/rtHz at 1kHz). I am sure that OPA627 is better for audio and better sounding.
Attachments
I mean, even if it were $50... it doesn't even look good or that interesting.
If I were going to spend stupid money on an actual alarm clock I'd get one of these ferrofluid clocks:
Ferrolic on Vimeo
Nixie tubes are sort of cool, too.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.