John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier

[scott wurcer]

You could always ask Scott.

We never figured that anyone would want to make a follower with an equivalent 50 Ohm noise resistance. The rbb on the input devices is artificially low by a trick that beats the process drawn geomertry rules. I don't really know but I think somehow it is a little like paralleling too many input devices.

I had a customer that put 128 743's on a board (EEG) and they acted through the supply lines like they were in parallel and oscillated in unison.

 

[Joshua_G]

Yes.

Can you post it here?

 

[Joshua_G]

Not meant as a compliment nor as an insult.

It's just that you give the impression of someone who reads from a pathology 101 book each time he visits his MD.
I figured i might as well add some sphincter talk.

Thank you very much for your illuminating input.

 

[Joshua_G]

To mis-quote Arthur Wellesley the Duke of Wellington, for Joshua_G it is not "publish and be damned" but probably "build and be damned"

Thank you very much for your illuminating input.

 

[Joshua_G]

Originally posted by SY

Yes, see the proven and documented circuits of Didden and Jung in AudioXpress, which have been duplicated by thousands of builders with great satisfaction. Excellent noise performance, excellent load and line rejection, they simply do what a DC supply is supposed to do, supply DC and NOT have a sound.

Can you give a direct link to it, or post it here?

Originally posted by SY

OTOH, if you're of the school which wants the electronics to have an aural signature (and there are many out there who do), you will not be happy with them.

No, I don't want a PSU to have a sound.
However, I feel that your hearing and mine differ.

 

[Joshua_G]

They can't think 'outside the box'!

That may be one reason.
I believe there is at least another one, but I'll better leave it as it is.

 

[Joshua_G]

John, you've never been binned for attacking a technical error. Ever.

It seems that the personal nature and the language used in some of the posts have escaped you.

May be because you also want very much to attack me personally.
I wonder if your own personal feelings interfere with your role of a moderator.

 

[Joshua_G]

That's been the origin, yes. A stubborn refusal to understand some basic engineering concepts and principles, along with a condescending attitude toward engineers with far more accomplishment and experience than his own, has exacerbated the issue.

A stubborn refusal to understand some basic engineering concepts and principles, like the claim that different well engineered cables cannot sound differently?

 

[Joshua_G]

No. JC stated nowhere, nor did anyone else, that JC's design
approach was using a standard circuit off the net, mistreating
it in > 10 ways, publishing the circuit each time and then biting the
feeding hand.

Thank you for your illuminating input.

 

[MJL21193]

It seems that the personal nature and the language used in some of the posts have escaped you.

May be because you also want very much to attack me personally.
I wonder if your own personal feelings interfere with your role of a moderator.

Hold on, I need to make some popcorn for this...

 

[gerhard]

Can you post it here?

Jung's regulators have been mentioned here already and
he has described them in detail. Reading that is a must.
<http://waltjung.org/Regs.html>
Google is your friend.


Mine are essentially Jung-ish but somewhat modified to allow
lower output voltage and SMD. I'm still not happy with the parts count
and I won't publish them unless they are fully characterized.

 

[john curl]

Joshua_G, it doesn't help to argue with 'them' with the same retort. They already know better.

 

[Joshua_G]

Joshua_G, it doesn't help to argue with 'them' with the same retort. They already know better.

Yes John, they know better, which is what bugs them.

 

[jacco vermeulen]

Thank you for your illuminating input.

 

[stinius]

That may be one reason.
I believe there is at least another one, but I'll better leave it as it is.

Joshua_G

I’m just a bit curious about what you mean.
Could you please just spell it out?

Stinius

 

[Joshua_G]

Joshua_G

I’m just a bit curious about what you mean.
Could you please just spell it out?

Stinius

I can, however, I don't want.
The answer may be within you.

 

[stinius]

I can, however, I don't want.
The answer may be within you.

Joshua_G

No, it’s not within me, as far as I know, so please tell me.

Stinius

 

[Joshua_G]

Joshua_G

No, it’s not within me, as far as I know, so please tell me.

Stinius

I told you – I don't want.

 

[scott wurcer]

A stubborn refusal to understand some basic engineering concepts and principles, like the claim that different well engineered cables cannot sound differently?

It has been stated repeatedly that there are any number of reasons for two cables to sound different. The steadfast refusal of some audiophiles to even explore these is a recurring disappointment. Does a cable you dislike make your favorite amplifier oscillate? I don't care or it doesn't matter are not appropriate answers.

I once joined a writer for a major audiophile mag for an evening of listening and noticed that loud bass notes dimmed his lights a little. He commented that the entire living space was on one 15A fuse. Do you think his cable or power cord reviews were worth anything?

 

[SY]

Can you give a direct link to it, or post it here?

I don't know if AudioXpress has published the articles on the web; you can certainly look on their website and see if of them are there. If not, they do sell back issues. It's a very worthwhile publication, so I'd highly recommend dropping a few shekels for the education and to support a very worthwhile organization. The previous link to Walt Jung's site may also pay dividends.