Intusoft models
Apologize for the long quote above, just want to be as througout as possible in reminding everybody where I am coming from.
I just got off the phone with an old aquintance, now working for Intusoft. He was so kind to email me the list of all japanese discrete devices that have models in the latest ICAP/4 (holding almost 24,000 models in total). The list is attached.
I'm afraid that none of the following devices that I was able to get from Steve's schematic ever had models in ICAP/4:
2SC5200
2SA1943
2SC4793
2SA1837
2SC1845
2SA992
So it's either that other models are used (Steve, please specify the models) or the above models are from a different source (Steve please specify the source). I'm still bound to get any model that is current available in the industry, for being able to reproduce Steve's amazing simulation results. All required licenses (if any) are on me.
Steve Dunlap said:
Bob Cordell said:
Steve Dunlap said:
syn08 said:
Steve Dunlap said:
Apologize for the long quote above, just want to be as througout as possible in reminding everybody where I am coming from.
I just got off the phone with an old aquintance, now working for Intusoft. He was so kind to email me the list of all japanese discrete devices that have models in the latest ICAP/4 (holding almost 24,000 models in total). The list is attached.
I'm afraid that none of the following devices that I was able to get from Steve's schematic ever had models in ICAP/4:
2SC5200
2SA1943
2SC4793
2SA1837
2SC1845
2SA992
So it's either that other models are used (Steve, please specify the models) or the above models are from a different source (Steve please specify the source). I'm still bound to get any model that is current available in the industry, for being able to reproduce Steve's amazing simulation results. All required licenses (if any) are on me.
hi syn08,
Were you a detective or lawyer in a previous life?
What is your point of hounding Steve?
regards
Were you a detective or lawyer in a previous life?
What is your point of hounding Steve?
regards
Re: Intusoft models
Well thank you for at least being through. The devices I used are on the linked list.
I will save you the trouble of wasting any more of your time. I have been lying all along. The amp doesn't exist and never did exist. The photos posted were all Photo Shop.
Or maybe this isn't a wast of your time. Maybe you enjoy what you perceive as your intellectual superiority for never having done anything original and attacking those who have. I could have gone with a cut and past "design" of a 30+ year old circuit like you, and been much safer. If everyone else has already done it, it must be the right way.
syn08 said:
Well thank you for at least being through. The devices I used are on the linked list.
I will save you the trouble of wasting any more of your time. I have been lying all along. The amp doesn't exist and never did exist. The photos posted were all Photo Shop.
Or maybe this isn't a wast of your time. Maybe you enjoy what you perceive as your intellectual superiority for never having done anything original and attacking those who have. I could have gone with a cut and past "design" of a 30+ year old circuit like you, and been much safer. If everyone else has already done it, it must be the right way.
Re: Re: Intusoft models
Steve, no need to get defensive, I'm trying to help. This is a good chance to clear the waters, I don't see any reason why rejecting the help I am offering here.
If they are in the list, can you specify the devices you used in your simulations? I promise to make all the required models available for everybody.
Steve Dunlap said:
Steve, no need to get defensive, I'm trying to help. This is a good chance to clear the waters, I don't see any reason why rejecting the help I am offering here.
If they are in the list, can you specify the devices you used in your simulations? I promise to make all the required models available for everybody.
jkeny said:
He can actually help a lot; I don’t think he is trying to fool anybody.
Please don’t be as hysterical as JC.
What follows is O/T, but somehow very relevant.
An original thinker posts a novel amp circuit, asking humbly for comment.
The output stage is extraordinary, with biasing arrangements of utterly original design. It is so new, and so unusual, simulators and audiophiles alike are frequently unable to figure out how it works.
Three groups respond. Those of math bent, keen on analysis; those who want to know how it sounds; and those who quietly, immediately, begin assembly to hear for themselves.
The purpose of high end is to bring more reality to recorded music. Understanding the working principles is interesting, but the amp itself shows no concern if the listener understands its operation or not. The designer, who is unwell and recently quadriplegic, is no longer able to build his own amps, and is keen to offer his intellectual property at no cost for others to build, listen and comment constructively.
One 'analyst' is trying to figure out why simulations vary and perhaps correctly settles on the models used. They vary, and might be giving spurious results. This is a distraction, I would opine, just as overt criticism of a 'switching' design is not called for at this stage.
Steve wants it built, listened to, and critiqued. It is original, and highly interesting. Along with many others, I don't fully understand it myself, but we should not criticise until we have heard it, worked with it. Let this be a construction thread, and next a listening thread. Once ten have been built, and debugged fully, and the working principle is better understood maybe the simulations will all agree (models, anyone?). Let's respect Steve for his original work, his altruism, and be ever mindful that right now is arguably the worst period of his life as he comes to grips with his illness and disabilities. I believe Steve has shown his bona fides but I'm not surprised at the criticism; anything new is ALWAYS criticised, particularly by the experts, who seem to need to assert their expertise at every call.
Please guys, open minds - it's really needed right now.
Hugh
An original thinker posts a novel amp circuit, asking humbly for comment.
The output stage is extraordinary, with biasing arrangements of utterly original design. It is so new, and so unusual, simulators and audiophiles alike are frequently unable to figure out how it works.
Three groups respond. Those of math bent, keen on analysis; those who want to know how it sounds; and those who quietly, immediately, begin assembly to hear for themselves.
The purpose of high end is to bring more reality to recorded music. Understanding the working principles is interesting, but the amp itself shows no concern if the listener understands its operation or not. The designer, who is unwell and recently quadriplegic, is no longer able to build his own amps, and is keen to offer his intellectual property at no cost for others to build, listen and comment constructively.
One 'analyst' is trying to figure out why simulations vary and perhaps correctly settles on the models used. They vary, and might be giving spurious results. This is a distraction, I would opine, just as overt criticism of a 'switching' design is not called for at this stage.
Steve wants it built, listened to, and critiqued. It is original, and highly interesting. Along with many others, I don't fully understand it myself, but we should not criticise until we have heard it, worked with it. Let this be a construction thread, and next a listening thread. Once ten have been built, and debugged fully, and the working principle is better understood maybe the simulations will all agree (models, anyone?). Let's respect Steve for his original work, his altruism, and be ever mindful that right now is arguably the worst period of his life as he comes to grips with his illness and disabilities. I believe Steve has shown his bona fides but I'm not surprised at the criticism; anything new is ALWAYS criticised, particularly by the experts, who seem to need to assert their expertise at every call.
Please guys, open minds - it's really needed right now.
Hugh
Thanks Hugh,
I agree totally! syn08 why don't you build one & measure it? The amount of energy you've expended in this quest for sim models is bewildering?
Stinius, I'm simply asking syn08 how exactly he's intending to help
I agree totally! syn08 why don't you build one & measure it? The amount of energy you've expended in this quest for sim models is bewildering?
Stinius, I'm simply asking syn08 how exactly he's intending to help
Steve Dunlap said:
jkeny said:
Steve claimed above that he simulated the amp with very good results. I am trying to remove any doubts regarding Steve's design by offering everybody the opportunity to reproduce the results.
I know better than many around that the gap between simulation and reality can be quite large. But if this design can be simulated (and again, this is what Steve claims above), this could be a significant step forward, until more of those building the amp will come up with some tangible results. Unfortunately, either subjective or even objective results can barely be reproduced in this virtual environment, therefore consistent simulation results could offer a common platform for everybody to learn something new about this design.
jkeny said:
Are you sure I didn't? 🙂
No trouble with the quest for models, I used to work in this business and know many contenders.
jkeny said:
Perhaps because I don't think it's appropriate, at least before others are finishing the constructions? I'm willing to disclose some results in private, though...
Well said.. the diplomat..
I attacked
this from both directions. I prototyped it,it sounded very good.. therefore I HAD to figure out WHY.
Using models that I knew lacked saturation data created
much frustration as I realized that was what "made it tick"
Using the KSA 1381/KSC3503 for all 6"krill" devices ,one can
see the "guts" of the topology at work. I have really
pounded my brains out on triple EF's and the krill really
deviates from the norm. Device selection is the big
issue here , even the wrong diodes "screw" it up.
OS
jkeny said:
I would have thought it bleeding obvious!
1. Steve has referred to simulating his circuit with specific results in the past.
2. Apparently everyone to date who has tried to replicate the simulation has not been able to match Steve's results. This in part is driving the rather strident criticism.
3. Syn08 seems to be doing everything in his power to replicate Steve's simulation to the nth degree and thus provide independent corroboration.
Then everyone can move on ....... or not!
Jimbo,
Instead of the simulation crowd continually beating themselves up & (everybody else) with this fixation, why not follow Hugh's sensible advice and extend some empathy to Steve's condition rather than harassing him continually or go build the thing & measure it? ..... then everybody can move on!
Instead of the simulation crowd continually beating themselves up & (everybody else) with this fixation, why not follow Hugh's sensible advice and extend some empathy to Steve's condition rather than harassing him continually or go build the thing & measure it? ..... then everybody can move on!
Hi syn08,
Thank you for helping here. I can see that you have spent a great deal of time and energy with this in order to help. Your offer to locate the actual models is both kind and helpful. The fact that you have also built an output section and tested it has not been lost on me either.
Hi jkeny,
syn08 is being very helpful and was the first one to build the output section with his own PCB design I think, excluding Steve of course.
Sometimes the tone of a post can be misunderstood. There are no vocal inflections or facial expressions to convey the intent of a written post. Try to think that a post is benign first, unless there is proof to the contrary. That might smooth all the ruffled feathers around here.
-Chris
Thank you for helping here. I can see that you have spent a great deal of time and energy with this in order to help. Your offer to locate the actual models is both kind and helpful. The fact that you have also built an output section and tested it has not been lost on me either.
Hi jkeny,
syn08 is being very helpful and was the first one to build the output section with his own PCB design I think, excluding Steve of course.
Sometimes the tone of a post can be misunderstood. There are no vocal inflections or facial expressions to convey the intent of a written post. Try to think that a post is benign first, unless there is proof to the contrary. That might smooth all the ruffled feathers around here.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.