John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2,674
mlloyd1 said:
is the goal to guess what john is doing and have him confirm it

or

come up with a nice preamp design based on some of john's key principles?

mlloyd1
(who is really digging the discussion! 🙂 )
Click to expand...

It's for you intelligent DIYers to guess and for John to drop a hint and mystify you all the more...🙂 And the legend of the Blowtorch grows...
 
#2,676
john curl said:
The real point is WHY John is doing it in a certain way...
Click to expand...


Bingo!
I like to try to learn from my mistakes. Better still from others.
And people profess not to understand why I listen to John, Nelson, and Charles instead of the endless debate about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin you see when the simulation crowd gets up a good head of steam.
Huh!

Grey
 
#2,678
GRollins said:
I like to try to learn from my mistakes. Better still from others.
[...]
... the simulation crowd ...
Click to expand...
A simulation can help you to avoid false tracks. And yes, sometimes it may draw you away from a good solution because "it doesn't sim well". I assume with the simulation crowd you refer only to those who blindly spend all their effort in a sub-ppm THD spec, for the sake of itself (I do this at times just for the fun of it, you may look at it as computer gaming).

IMHO simulation with a real-life background from the experimenter is a good partial(!) practical alternative to "breadboarding into the blue", besides the theoretical aspects of understanding circuits better (especially those of other people which you don't fully get just from passively looking at the schematic alone, so why not actively sim it and gain something? I learned a huge amount about discrete audio amplifier design just from simming a few of the zillions of interesting circuits flying around here). One will need to breadboard any successfully simmed circuit anyway, then build a real proto, and the next time you do something similar you probably sim it better in the first place (practial form of feedback, in a sense).

In case that I got your comments wrong, I apologize (I'm not a native speaker)

- Klaus
 
#2,679
KSTR said:
... "breadboarding into the blue", ... I learned a huge amount about discrete audio amplifier design just from simming a few of the zillions of interesting circuits flying around here). One will need to breadboard any successfully simmed circuit anyway, ...

- Klaus
Click to expand...

Exactly...I do it for the same reason. I believe NP and CH sins, er, sims from time to time too...
 
#2,680
KSTR said:
I assume with the simulation crowd you refer only to those who blindly spend all their effort in a sub-ppm THD spec, for the sake of itself.
Click to expand...


🙄 Seriously - just who would that be then?
Sorry, it is just another inane rant against an imaginary opposition.


KSTR said:
IMHO simulation with a real-life background from the experimenter is a good partial(!) practical alternative to "breadboarding into the blue", besides the theoretical aspects of understanding circuits better (especially those of other people which you don't fully get just from passively looking at the schematic alone, so why not actively sim it and gain something? I learned a huge amount about discrete audio amplifier design just from simming a few of the zillions of interesting circuits flying around here [/B]
Click to expand...


I think that you are speaking into deaf ears. Some people really aren’t interested in learning; they have a terminal bug up their rear with anyone how does, have no ideas of their own worth mentioning and are only interested in mindlessly and conceitedly parroting the convictions of their beloved Messiahs (thinking themselves Holy as well).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom