I have tried, but nothing. But if I touch the sink then again, lower ripple = lower output impedance. Seems to be some sort of RF effect. Could it be shielding?
salas, the line rejection is better than I can measure already. The only ripple comes from the active load sine wave. Or are you wondering if a better prefilter would actually increase the ripple in low frequencies?
Yes.
Don't know why, but seeing the ripple in half was convincing. Perhaps the hfe of that particular 2N5087 was higher in this sample. I'll measure both.
Edit: BC560C hfe 470, 2N5087 hfe 370
Last edited:
I think that if you will ground the minisink with a crock clip you will know.
I mean killing hash beyond audio range. Like if prefiltering can cut enough so to bring a non cascoded source near to a cascoded one and make a cascoded one better for around MHz RF rejection. On the other hand it will increase source impedance and I am afraid it can pick up a litle hum.
I mean killing hash beyond audio range. Like if prefiltering can cut enough so to bring a non cascoded source near to a cascoded one and make a cascoded one better for around MHz RF rejection. On the other hand it will increase source impedance and I am afraid it can pick up a litle hum.
''Edit: BC560C hfe 470, 2N5087 hfe 370 ''
Only thing I can think of is that the MPSH81 has nearer internal impedance to the 2N5087 than to the 560C so it picks up less stuff, since it is even touch sensitive.
Edit: What about BC560 on BC560? Has tendency to oscillate?
''Only thing I can think of is that the MPSH81 has nearer internal impedance to the 2N5087 than to the 560C so it picks up less stuff, since it is even touch sensitive.
Edit: What about BC560 on BC560? Has tendency to oscillate?
Patiently waiting for the result of the 560c versus 2n5087 and the heatsink, and suspending my Farnell order for the time being...
😴
😴
Ah, ok, I'll try grounding the minisink. As for the prefilter high impedance, I don't know. Not that I trust sims too much, but they don't show problems. A good gyrator is on the todo list, so I'll test it when it's done. These are good questions salas. We have yet more work ahead. On the other hand one can just go the syn08 way and implement high psrr in the amp/preamp itself, and not worry so much about the psu.
It will always be perceivable it seems. If it was like that, why nut nut hears V1, V1.1, V2 and all capacitors with OPA627 circuits? Low PSRR?😕
I guess PSRR may need to be higher than 100dB before it becomes inaudible. So far the OPA627 seems to have the highest PSRR and it sounds better than other opamps I tried.
But then the OPA627 has only 80dB PSRR at 20kHz. Yes I know that 80dB means 1/10,000. So a regulator like this is highly beneficial.
I previously found the OPA627 sounded much better than the LM4562 and they sounded very differently. The v2 prototype I built brought the LM4562 much closer to the OPA627, only lost at the higher end of the audio frequency. From my memory, the OPA627 has better PSRR on one rail than the LM4562, and that difference may not be larger than 10dB. Yet that 10dB makes a huge difference in perceivable sound quality, and that is on top of the already 70-90 something dB PSSR.
The difference between the sound of this regulator (with remote sensing) and a LM317/337 is night and day.
But then the OPA627 has only 80dB PSRR at 20kHz. Yes I know that 80dB means 1/10,000. So a regulator like this is highly beneficial.
I previously found the OPA627 sounded much better than the LM4562 and they sounded very differently. The v2 prototype I built brought the LM4562 much closer to the OPA627, only lost at the higher end of the audio frequency. From my memory, the OPA627 has better PSRR on one rail than the LM4562, and that difference may not be larger than 10dB. Yet that 10dB makes a huge difference in perceivable sound quality, and that is on top of the already 70-90 something dB PSSR.
The difference between the sound of this regulator (with remote sensing) and a LM317/337 is night and day.
Just tried the grounded minisink. Still, my fingers provide the lowest ripple 
Heeelp! Anybody? Why?
I will still use the 2N5087s that I have. I haven't tried BC560+BC560, but I have tried 2N5087+2N5087, and still the better one is to use MPSH81 on the bottom.
hifinutnut, sorry about this, but, as you can see it's work in progress.
salas, I am convinced that hifinutnut does hear those changes. The brain has a great ability to discern very subtle nuances. In photography it took me a while to discern subtle effects. In many fields it's the same. Wine tasting, fine foods, etc. Subtle differences take time to appreciate. The brain rearranges things, self-organization. An ever evolving filter. The moment we lose the ability to experience things on a very personal level, we lose a lot.
Heeelp! Anybody? Why?I will still use the 2N5087s that I have. I haven't tried BC560+BC560, but I have tried 2N5087+2N5087, and still the better one is to use MPSH81 on the bottom.
hifinutnut, sorry about this, but, as you can see it's work in progress.
salas, I am convinced that hifinutnut does hear those changes. The brain has a great ability to discern very subtle nuances. In photography it took me a while to discern subtle effects. In many fields it's the same. Wine tasting, fine foods, etc. Subtle differences take time to appreciate. The brain rearranges things, self-organization. An ever evolving filter. The moment we lose the ability to experience things on a very personal level, we lose a lot.
Ah, not fair! We have to compare to better ones 😀
By the way, about the psrr of various opamps. don't forget that psrr is a function of frequency.
I have to say that I like the approach of John Curl, who tries to get rid of as much crud that's coming from the power line as possible. It only costs a few parts and a few volts dropped. I guess I just like the idea of separating psu filtering and signal amplification. Not that I have anything against amps with high psrr either, if done well.
NutNut, did you try any of the LME series that the word is out for being good? Had used OPA627+637 for preamp I made in 1991. Got em on instict for trying, it cost me US$150 for 2+2 special order 18 years ago! I gave it to a neighbour after much use, he redid the paint work in an automobile painter's facility in pearl blue, I had it with knobs from Fender Telecaster that he kept. He asked me yesterday to listen to it again as he hooked it up for a second system, and still is playing excellently.
Iko, I think that each order of improvement is not we directly hear as an absolute value, there is a certain threshold of perception. But what we maybe hear is the new linearity that presents information in a bolder way. I think that absolute numbers are just the hints not goals. As long as the complexity remains relatively the same.
Iko, I think that each order of improvement is not we directly hear as an absolute value, there is a certain threshold of perception. But what we maybe hear is the new linearity that presents information in a bolder way. I think that absolute numbers are just the hints not goals. As long as the complexity remains relatively the same.
Just tried the grounded minisink. Still, my fingers provide the lowest ripple
I know the answer😀 Hmm, maybe you just shield because no box not only with finger but with whole body going over.
Well said, hints.
As far as I'm concerned absolute numbers exist only in mathematics. Like the perfect circle 😀
Just tried the grounded minisink. Still, my fingers provide the lowest ripple
Many years ago I had my friend to modify my NAD541i CD player. There was an interesting finding:
When the top cover of the CD player was removed, the music had more "air", "transparency". That defied logic. Perhaps the added RF hash could be perceived as better sound?
The comparison was so easy and we simply moved the cover on top (without touching it, i.e. not grounded) and took it away, again and again. The difference was very audible. At the end, my friend decided to make a trasparent top to replace the original metal top.
Same feeling with non shielded interconnects initially, but tiresome in the long run. Some systems just balance out subjectively though. Especially if with boxed speakers swimming in untread room modes...
I have not tried the LME. There was a thread started by a guy who was in the team to develop the LME. According to him, the LME and the LM4562 were the same.
Anyway, the LM4562 was highly hyped. It betters the opa2134 for sure. But still the OPA627 is the best. About a couple of years ago while my system did not have the higher resolution as it is now, for once I could not tell which one I preferred, but still found them quite different. I guess the differences are mostly due to PSRR, as the v2 has brought the LM4562 so much closer, and unless I listen very carefully and do A-B, I can't tell the difference in the midrange and lower frequencies. Only at the top end the LM4562 is audibly hashier. Perhaps the new revision of v2 will bring them even closer?
I can't foresay, there must be many things individual to your build that accept some op amps better or not. I would prefilter with a common mode choke the whole thing though, that is a worthy experiment for guarding hash.
Oh, you like photography. How much resolution can you discern with this 57k only file, a photo I took a few years ago in Burma. Sorry for OT.
When I look at this photo, I hear music.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
In larger film format ( > 35mm ), and possibly with slide film, one can easily find siginficant improvement on resolution and details, which make a much larger impact on our visual, emotional response when looking at a good photo. The photo I attached earlier does not have the resolution.
I have read dozens and dozens of art books with printings of many historical oil paintings. The images in the books serve the purpose of education. But they simply lack of the emotional impact when comparing to seeing the original oil paintings hung in art galleries. It is a completely different experience. I could go into any of the famous art galleries in Europe, stare at one painting for one hour with no problem.
It is the same way when comparing HiFi to live music.
With the best HiFi and music source material, I have sometimes the illusions of hearing the real thing, but most of the time I don't. I have a 25k RRP piano at home my daughter plays (she is only at level 3) and I can compare the real piano sound with the illusionary piano sound from my HiFi. Live feeling is something I am striving to achieve. With good efforts, we can come closer. I found in terms of emotional response, a good system does the job. An ordinary system (and even many megabug commercial systems) does not arouse my emotion.
If the total system distortion is reduced to a low level, one can easily hear the differences between opamps, capacitors, etc, with a bit of training. If the total system distortion is high, those differences can be completely masked.
The ex-president of the Sydney Audio Club, a life-long audiophile who had obviously spent countless hours listening to the differences between CDs and SACDs, insisted that there were hardly any differences between the two medias, until he heard my system a few months ago and changed his mind, later telling everyone in the club that SACDs were better.
I have read dozens and dozens of art books with printings of many historical oil paintings. The images in the books serve the purpose of education. But they simply lack of the emotional impact when comparing to seeing the original oil paintings hung in art galleries. It is a completely different experience. I could go into any of the famous art galleries in Europe, stare at one painting for one hour with no problem.
It is the same way when comparing HiFi to live music.
With the best HiFi and music source material, I have sometimes the illusions of hearing the real thing, but most of the time I don't. I have a 25k RRP piano at home my daughter plays (she is only at level 3) and I can compare the real piano sound with the illusionary piano sound from my HiFi. Live feeling is something I am striving to achieve. With good efforts, we can come closer. I found in terms of emotional response, a good system does the job. An ordinary system (and even many megabug commercial systems) does not arouse my emotion.
If the total system distortion is reduced to a low level, one can easily hear the differences between opamps, capacitors, etc, with a bit of training. If the total system distortion is high, those differences can be completely masked.
The ex-president of the Sydney Audio Club, a life-long audiophile who had obviously spent countless hours listening to the differences between CDs and SACDs, insisted that there were hardly any differences between the two medias, until he heard my system a few months ago and changed his mind, later telling everyone in the club that SACDs were better.
Last edited:
He-he, photography is my other hobby, older too. Nice photo hifinutnut (did I mention that I enjoy fishing too? 😀)
I gave up on trying to emulate the live music feeling at home. The immediacy of sound in live music is to me, is the ultimate musical experience. There were plenty shows with lots of surrounding noise, but it took nothing away from the dynamic of the live presentation, and the emotional impact. I'll give up some level of "quiteness" any day to get that dynamic and real sound. It's interesting to me that there is a parallel of this in photography. Some lenses are capable of delivering very, very sharp images. Yet, they are sterile, they lack something. Other lenses, less sharp, can give you almost a 3d feeling. They can have microcontrast and colour reproduction that leaves you in awe. So, to me, it's not all about the lowest noise number or the sharpest lens.
Here's an example made by an old Angenieux manual focus lens, not the sharpest, but can you dig the colours (no photoshop)?
I gave up on trying to emulate the live music feeling at home. The immediacy of sound in live music is to me, is the ultimate musical experience. There were plenty shows with lots of surrounding noise, but it took nothing away from the dynamic of the live presentation, and the emotional impact. I'll give up some level of "quiteness" any day to get that dynamic and real sound. It's interesting to me that there is a parallel of this in photography. Some lenses are capable of delivering very, very sharp images. Yet, they are sterile, they lack something. Other lenses, less sharp, can give you almost a 3d feeling. They can have microcontrast and colour reproduction that leaves you in awe. So, to me, it's not all about the lowest noise number or the sharpest lens.
Here's an example made by an old Angenieux manual focus lens, not the sharpest, but can you dig the colours (no photoshop)?
Just tried the grounded minisink. Still, my fingers provide the lowest ripple
At a guess, the transistor's hFE is climbing with temperature ..... maybe try holding a soldering iron a few mm away?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.