Gents. Get back on topic.
1. Figure out WHERE the hum came from.
2. Figure out HOW the hum got into the system.
3. Figure out the coupling mechanism.
4. Figure out the coupling geometry.
5. Figure out the coupling frequency dependence.
6. Figure out why the frequency dependence.
7. Figure out how to make the equipment NOT generate the fields that are coupling.
8. Figure out how to remove the receiver portion of the coupling pair.
This is an easy problem gents...
do it.
one step at a time..
ps...it's not about the hum guys, it's about the process. What makes anyone think that 60 hz is special? or that it's the only thing?
John
1. Figure out WHERE the hum came from.
2. Figure out HOW the hum got into the system.
3. Figure out the coupling mechanism.
4. Figure out the coupling geometry.
5. Figure out the coupling frequency dependence.
6. Figure out why the frequency dependence.
7. Figure out how to make the equipment NOT generate the fields that are coupling.
8. Figure out how to remove the receiver portion of the coupling pair.
This is an easy problem gents...
do it.
one step at a time..
ps...it's not about the hum guys, it's about the process. What makes anyone think that 60 hz is special? or that it's the only thing?
John
Buckapound said:
Not sure if Simon had a motor in mind talking of impedance or an amplifier but here is my experience. I have built numerous "Valhalla" and "Lingo" type power supplies for LP12 and also experimented with a 200VA step-down transformer. Never noticed any reduction in quality using the regenerators although obviously they are not capable of passing 30A. Driving impedance, otoh is likely, very low.
A similar experiment but with a Garrard 301 uses a step up transformer from the output of the regenerator, which guarantees a substantially higher driving impedance. At least as high as the resistance of the secondary - tens of ohms. Nothing in the sound indicates a problem. Of course synchronous motors are not particularly sensitive to supply voltage and likely not to driving impedance.
Amplifiers are completely different. Any kind of bottleneck, non-linearity, ferrites along the power lines are immediately audible. The filters SY mentions often remove HF noise at the expense of killing dynamics. And so do fuses, isolation transformers, practically any kind of series filters. Is it because they raise or make the mains impedance non-linear?
Note also that some listeners actually enjoy the effect of filters, even obviously poorly designed ones. I guess they prefer the loss of dynamics to the removal of HF hash. This seems to only happen in digital source systems so they obviously demand some form of mains filtering.
Unless the music you like listening to consists purely of 100 or 120 Hertz spectra, AND that same music is somehow miraculously in phase with your local nuke, the linkage between "system dynamics" and mains filtering (ferrites and such) is pretty flimsy.
poobah said:Unless the music you like listening to consists purely of 100 or 120 Hertz spectra, AND that same music is somehow miraculously in phase with your local nuke, the linkage between "system dynamics" and mains filtering (ferrites and such) is pretty flimsy.
Hey there..long time no speakey...
How ya feelin lately?? Hope all's well.
John
The best measuring equipment for audio is your ears, they don't lie. Your brain may lie but that's up to you 😀
Listen to good leads for more than a quick test, give it a few weeks then go back to the boggo leads and if you really can't tell a difference then get rid of the 'good' ones. If you can then great keep them.
Brent
Listen to good leads for more than a quick test, give it a few weeks then go back to the boggo leads and if you really can't tell a difference then get rid of the 'good' ones. If you can then great keep them.
Brent
Hi j,
Just wrapping up a loooooong job for the Nat. Sci. guys... a system with an S/N ratio of +150 dB. All this done with very boring/mundane wire. I can come up for air now!
About to get C6-C7 in the neck fused (or???)... as the disc is crushing my main harness.
Everything else is cool though!
😀
Just wrapping up a loooooong job for the Nat. Sci. guys... a system with an S/N ratio of +150 dB. All this done with very boring/mundane wire. I can come up for air now!
About to get C6-C7 in the neck fused (or???)... as the disc is crushing my main harness.
Everything else is cool though!
😀
My downstairs neighbors would disagree.
So would my ears. Dynamics are just about my own top priority, which is why I rail so much about compression on the software end.
SY,
I take it you are not listening to 120 Hz tones phase locked to the grid???
And ditto on the issue of compression. Making compelling music is akin to pleasing females; it's far easier to genuinely please them occasionally if you first dissappoint them on general level.
😀
I take it you are not listening to 120 Hz tones phase locked to the grid???
And ditto on the issue of compression. Making compelling music is akin to pleasing females; it's far easier to genuinely please them occasionally if you first dissappoint them on general level.
😀
poobah said:
Imagine the S/N you coulda gotten with monocrystalline 5 nines cryoed copper? Smells like "upgrades" to me...yup yup..you sly devel you...
poobah said:
Ugh....well good luck with the C's.. I hadn't seen ya of late, so was wondering...
Me, still hangin in there. cable trays, rad hard wire, 800 meter diameter ground loop...same o same o.
Not like it's rocket science or sumptin.. just wires..lots and lots of wires...one wire...two wire, redfish...er wire... blue wire...
Cheers, John
Hmmm...mighty suspicious of you to mention (2nd) harmonic instead of fundamentals..poobah said:
Course, you are incorrect in the path your thoughts are taking you.
Stick to odd order harmonics...Dat be da key..
pssssss..even order harmonics after the bridge...odd order before the bridge..
Hmmmm...lets see...I've dissapointed thousands of women on a general level...can that mean.......poobah said:
Nah....couldn't..nevermind
Cheers, John
1 First off a little education. Electrical engineering IS physics and math, I know a PhD in math that did his doctoral thesis in EE. Compare most EE textbooks and physics texts and you will not tell the difference. Science (and engineering) are based on fact, especially physics ( measurable and repeatable data). You think audio can get esoteric, look into astrophysics or accelerater technology. Scientists and engineers do make mistakes but they will admit it when knew data contradicts there theories (see how i called it a theory) The laws of physics are never turned over.(when was the last time you droped something and it didnt fall? How can you dish EEs when the amazing things they design are all around you (the super computer in your laptop, measuring the left over energy from the big bang 14 billion years ago, poohbas 150db S/N) You think this stuff was easy or they got lucky?
2 With the amount of money going into esoteric audio (over $300 for your power cords?) you know some one is doing some R&D (but I bet its a small fraction of the marketing budget, because they know its hype not science that sells these products) So why no AES papers ? No papers in scientific journals. The marketing departments would love to hype a real scientific paper proving the your not wasting large coin. Why havent they got one? They have enough money.
3 Cables do make a difference, but its basic eletrical and physical characteristics; resistance capacitance, inductance, shielding. All can be measured an listed (and usually are in studio wiring). There are no mystical materials or manufacturing techniques that add other characteristics. Using 1ft of regular cable is the same as using 2 feet of cable that has half the cap. and res. thats it. No magic. If a power cable has enough gauge and is propery connected it will not effect the sound. Those that say different have to prove it. (Or has this become religion). Can it be that hard? Test equipment has become better than your hearing. YESSS it has! (I know its hard to admit but let that ego go and think like a scientist.) Show me some reliable measurements (measurable and repeatable data) Or this whole conversation is a waste and we may as well be talking religion. What does: it sounds better mean? Is the freq flatter, less noise, cleaner(less distortion) etc.
4 Why havent high end audio manufacteres gone to ballanced high level (+4dbm) interconnect circuits which would lower the small amount of cable effects by at least one order of magnitude? The additional cost would be a very small percentage.
2 With the amount of money going into esoteric audio (over $300 for your power cords?) you know some one is doing some R&D (but I bet its a small fraction of the marketing budget, because they know its hype not science that sells these products) So why no AES papers ? No papers in scientific journals. The marketing departments would love to hype a real scientific paper proving the your not wasting large coin. Why havent they got one? They have enough money.
3 Cables do make a difference, but its basic eletrical and physical characteristics; resistance capacitance, inductance, shielding. All can be measured an listed (and usually are in studio wiring). There are no mystical materials or manufacturing techniques that add other characteristics. Using 1ft of regular cable is the same as using 2 feet of cable that has half the cap. and res. thats it. No magic. If a power cable has enough gauge and is propery connected it will not effect the sound. Those that say different have to prove it. (Or has this become religion). Can it be that hard? Test equipment has become better than your hearing. YESSS it has! (I know its hard to admit but let that ego go and think like a scientist.) Show me some reliable measurements (measurable and repeatable data) Or this whole conversation is a waste and we may as well be talking religion. What does: it sounds better mean? Is the freq flatter, less noise, cleaner(less distortion) etc.
4 Why havent high end audio manufacteres gone to ballanced high level (+4dbm) interconnect circuits which would lower the small amount of cable effects by at least one order of magnitude? The additional cost would be a very small percentage.
What is ""accelerater technology""??? izzat the thing I push with my foot to go faster??😀cbdb said:
Hmmm.. Ray Davis...cbdb said:
Ummm, last summer.cbdb said:
But when the hydrogen leaked out of the balloon, it came down..
cbdb said:
My money's on luck..
Cheers, John..
ps..why the rant? Seemed such a quiet neighborhood...
the rant? because im sick of people calling superstion science.The world is flat no matter how many pictures I see! I am new to these posts dhould I get used to "audio magic" ?
cbdb said:
Welcome to this humble abode..
Your gonna find all kind of people, all kinds of opinion. No need to go ballistic..just be nice, make your point..keep it civil..
You never know what kinds are hangin here...heck, there might even be some physicists or (shudder) superconducting accelerator component builders here..never know....😉
Cheers, John
- Status
- Not open for further replies.