John John John John John, this is a crazy good analogy, but you missed a good way to use it.
Let me rephrase it in a few bits.
You not an autophile if you prefer a standard transmission over a PDK/Dual-clutch/paddle shifter. That is because the standard transmissions is inferior by the numbers, very much so. If you drive a vintage car and prefer inferior suspension when new better stuff is available, you are not an autophile. You are an autofool for paying more money for a car that is more expensive and has worse specifications than any other that beats it by the numbers for less; vintage are especially foolish.
Those statements are exactly, EXACTLY like how people on this forum like to treat others. And often I think the people around here are right about many things, and there are a lot of extremely questionable things out there they point at. But generally speaking I think the line that is crossed that is so bad is the marketing lies that are perpetrated, and nothing to do with persecution for preference for decisions that aren't "just" under the paradigm of good engineering, that are so frequent.
Good thread. I needed those opinions to serve a purpose at the time. And now it can exists as a warning to those searching and trying to make AC cords from unconventional materials.
Last edited:
What I find amazing is how many different pet theories there are about what makes a good sounding audio device. A quick survey of the market shows no obvious consensus or correlation to commercial success with said theories.
For example, feedback is the devil and so are ferrites, op-amps, SMPS, and sigma-delta converters... and yet there are popular, audiophile-acclaimed, Stereophile A rated components that have some or all of the above. There are many on this forum that will try to shove those views down your throat as well, telling you that their design methodology is the only true way and everything else is mid-fi.
The car analogies are just not accurate for the most part. The manual transmission driver KNOWS it's slower, but they do it for the fun. I don't see much of that in audio. People are paying megabucks for gear they think performs better, whether it does or not.
For example, feedback is the devil and so are ferrites, op-amps, SMPS, and sigma-delta converters... and yet there are popular, audiophile-acclaimed, Stereophile A rated components that have some or all of the above. There are many on this forum that will try to shove those views down your throat as well, telling you that their design methodology is the only true way and everything else is mid-fi.
The car analogies are just not accurate for the most part. The manual transmission driver KNOWS it's slower, but they do it for the fun. I don't see much of that in audio. People are paying megabucks for gear they think performs better, whether it does or not.
It performs better for their subjective reasons. When they say perform, they mean what they hear. They aren't under the impression it measures better; countless audiophiles roll their eyes and walk away from people that talk about measurements. They may believe parts are superior, and for their reasoning they are.
Ferrites I would say have rare application that is good. The rest can be used well or poorly. And there is a stronger consistency for less feedback being the most desired. Exceptions that are on a stereophile list are not a norm.
Ferrites I would say have rare application that is good. The rest can be used well or poorly. And there is a stronger consistency for less feedback being the most desired. Exceptions that are on a stereophile list are not a norm.
Yeah, I completely disagree there is any consistency. 47 Labs Gaincard is and was very popular, for just one example off the top of my head. An evil chip-amp with electrolytic caps.
47 Labs is an enigma altogether! They seem to often appeal to people that can believe in simple things (legit or not) in a "sage" fashion, but wouldn't DIY. Although I must admit, I really want their tuner because it looks sweet and I don't give a rats *** about trying to get super quality out of news radio.
Some components do become classics and hold their value for a very long time. Some designers even have multiple classic components, so they understand how to make something measure and sound good. There's some consistency. Almost all of the most popular (higher priced) used equipment sold on eBay are tube based, i.e. McIntosh, ARC, Marantz. So we know people react positively to tube sound. Some of the most popular (higher priced) sold used solid state is usually John Curl's designed Levinson, D'Agostino's Krell, etc.
But maybe those inconsistencies you speak of exist because there's just so much more that we don't know about audio/electrical engineering, physics, psycho acoustics, etc.?
One can spend an entire lifetime looking at a scope screen and release the most perfectly engineered product, but which doesn't sound so good and is not well received universally. In the end, it has to be judged by a human ear.
Audiophiles should not dismiss the tremendous work engineers have done to get us to where were are today and continue to do. Good sounding products don't just happen by luck.
And engineers should not be so proud as to dismiss the valuable feedback that audiophiles offer by actually listening, even if the scope screen looked perfect.
IMO, to make consistently great and better measuring and sounding audio equipment, new ideas will have to be born and new technology and science invented.
Last edited:
And then some self appointed golden ears will evaluate, eyes large open, the results. Still pondering what is more appropriate here, a
or a 
.
I would agree that magnet wire could be relatively unsafe as a power cable. I learned all about electrical safety when I got a full time job as a tech at Underwriter's Labs for about a year, in 1962, (when Scott was 12 years old by the way). Underwriter's was a very boring job for both the engineers and the techs, but it did teach me a good deal about electrical safety. Unfortunately, the job, even at the engineering level, (I usually had to teach the new engineers a specific area of testing, after awhile, so I knew both positions), and I mistakenly thought that this was a typical example of what engineers did, so I switched my major to Physics when I went back to college. Big mistake, at least I thought so after a year of time.
Last edited:
John, they asked the question to the random public, chances are few of the respondents ever had wine tasting experience, or had ever had wine over 10 Euro's a bottle. It takes training to hone ones discriminating faculties. Plus a fair amount of money.
This example cannot be used to invalidate blind testing. Of course people who do not know their derriere from their elbow will wipe the wrong spot.
Of course, it is nonsense, BUT you guys pull the same level of testing on audio equipment without thinking twice that it might not be accurate!
A common-mode EMI ferrite and an EMI common-mode choke is the same thing in my book as the CM choke has a ferrite core of the same type. Only the number of turns differs (0.5 vs some 10's) and hence the range where it is most effective (0.5 turn is good to GHz whereas multiturn can go capacitive at as low as a few MHz and is ineffective above). Actually I combine parts with different # of turns (ferrites and chokes) to have broadband high impedance.
Few enclosures can stop Ghz anyways, in audio.
My only real "theory" on ferrite clamps vs. other things is too nutty sounding to bother you with. But by principle I prefer series devices that I can control within the complex impedance. I suggest thinking about Q factors when looking at AC filtration.
My only real "theory" on ferrite clamps vs. other things is too nutty sounding to bother you with. But by principle I prefer series devices that I can control within the complex impedance. I suggest thinking about Q factors when looking at AC filtration.
Thanks.simon7000 said:
I think we know enough about physics and electrical engineering to make good audio systems. By 'we' I mean the sum of human knowledge; obviously there are individual people who don't know enough and some of these work commercially in audio or have audio as a hobby. Psychoacoustics we know less about, yet we know quite a lot and what we know seems to be generally conformed by tests when no peeking is allowed.ridikas said:
No need for new science; big need for some people to learn old science properly.
What can you learn from this photo:
passive correction 75us (C5R6R9) after first opamp
3180us and 318us time constants form in the second noninverting opamp (1/2 U2) feedback network (C6R10R18R7)
unity gain inverter for balanced output (1/2 U2)
servo U3
please notice absence of ferrites, gold-plated NKK switch for MC/MM selection, high quality Rel-Caps ($35 each at Reliable TFT Capacitors )
I believe that Rel-Caps were preselected and have much better tolerance, then 10%, I also think that slight dark signature of OPA2134 is compensated by Vishay CMF55 resistors. First op amp selection is extremely important and John probably can reveal why LME part is exactly in this place.
So use your imagination and make something great
Attachments
Current sources on all IC outputs (except servo) is one of the important details of this design, I think.
Last edited:
Generous use of copper pours
No diodes anywhere
TO-220 Q4,Q5 are probably "capacitance multiplier" supply filters
U1 laid out for both DIP and SOIC packages
Inexpensive resistor R7 connected in series with expensive resistor R8
Two "104J100" film capacitors per IC, probably connected as supply bypass
Polystyrene (!) capacitors C1,C3
Oddly, the number of discrete transistors is an odd number
No diodes anywhere
TO-220 Q4,Q5 are probably "capacitance multiplier" supply filters
U1 laid out for both DIP and SOIC packages
Inexpensive resistor R7 connected in series with expensive resistor R8
Two "104J100" film capacitors per IC, probably connected as supply bypass
Polystyrene (!) capacitors C1,C3
Oddly, the number of discrete transistors is an odd number
Consumer goods aren't tested at all for EMI immunity in the US, what's why you can you get away not caring about that. In the EU, less so. But still the examiner here only tests for gross fault, escpecially when you have digital logic/controllers etc. Some demodulation in the audio path is not a deal breaker unless it is strong and immediately obvious to the examiner (DUT is an active speaker or has an headphone output).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.