The Black Hole......

Jump to Latest
#7,943
Its not the nicest looking electrostat room in town, if that's what matters to someone. You could have one similarly equipped as in the pic for maybe around $50k-$60k, if you shopped wisely. Outperforms some serious $200k systems. The one in the pic is assembled of used and diy components, and of prototype circuitry. Saves some $$$ as we all try to do with diy.
System sounds fabulous now, measures excellently, and more will happen as time goes on.

...and, with that you are back on my ignore list. Good day. 🙂
 
Last edited:
#7,944
Joe Rasmussen said:
Hi Hans, appreciate your input and yes, this is an extraordinary bandwidth and even more, it stops on a dime (yes guys, I know it is called settling time, so calm down).

I can't show you the circuit as there are commercial issues. Re RIAA, I gathered somebody would remark about that, so I was prepared. I am pretty sure that you know about the Hagerman Inverse RIAA and how he was influenced by Allen Wright re the Neumann cutting amp is set at 3.18ms – or
50,048Hz.

Allen and I came up with our Inverse RIAA that is slightly different in values from Hagerman's - our's we feel are tighter than his 'off-the-shelf' that you can buy. No issues with that. It's still pretty good.

The square wave I have published was done using our (call it Allen's if you like, I am not claiming anything) Inverse RIAA. I think there are only three made and the screenshot is from a 200MHz oscilloscope. So it was made using that 'anti-RIAA' as you called it, and tested using it.

Do I feel a need for 1MHz, let alone 4MHz? Good question, but as an exercise, that screenshot is still pretty amazing. I never checked that it was 4MHz, but both Allen and I rated it within 1dB at 1MHz.

It's how the circuit sounds that is important and yes, incrementally it has been improved to the point it has reached the end. In some ways, it sounds like what I would call 'correct' tubes, and fast and yet not emphasising it unnaturally. So there you are.
Click to expand...
Sorry Joe,

It have a hard time taking this for granted.
See the image below, where I used a mathematical perfect Anti-Riaa followed by a perfect Riaa.
To relax the requirements for the Anti-Riaa I have put a 4Mhz filter directly after the square wave generator.,
You see the circuit diagram at the left, in the middle the Input signal directly after the 4Mhz filter and the Output signal from the Riaa filter.
So far so good, Output is exactly the picture you gave us.

But now have a look at the plot at the right.
To produce a 100KHz square wave with 4Mhz BW, the Anti-Riaa will have to produce a signal of almost 17.000 Volt.
Do I have to say more ?

Hans
.
 

Attachments

  • Joe A-Riaa.jpg
    Joe A-Riaa.jpg
    198.6 KB · Views: 186
Last edited:
#7,947
Markw4 said:
Now, what Bruno and Lars choose to say in public does appear to be driven by commercial motivation. They talk about things they think might give them some competitive advantage in the marketplace. They also don't go into so much depth so as to make it easy for their competitors to benefit from the knowledge. That means simple, scientifically unsupported writeups are likely all we are going to get at least until competitors catch up on their own.
Click to expand...


I find this amusing from someone who has on 5 occasions I can think of quoted some 'secret' research quoted in marketing documents to support their belief in noise floor modulation. And who used to quote Benchmark white papers as if they were the abolute truth, at least until he found a 'better' DAC.



I don't think that anyone is naive enough to think that company white papers and blogs are anything but carefully crafted advertising?
 
#7,951
rayma said:
Exactly.
Click to expand...

Markw4 said:
Do we realize that we infer the intentions and or motivations of other people, and our inferences are strongly influenced by our biases?

I don't infer that Joe's intention was only to provoke a reaction for his amusement, so it was not trolling to me.

What I did infer from what I read here was that Joe was trying to get certain people to realize they are not as objective as they think they are. It wasn't for his amusement, it was an attempt to get people to drop their mental blocks that prevent them from seeing what Joe is trying to explain to them.

The problem now is that Joe's attempt has backfired on him, as its true purpose has been blocked and rejected like everything else he says. At that point the only explanation left in some minds is that trolling must be his purpose.
Click to expand...

Or armchair philosophers and psychologists see what they want from what's in front of them? I'm not sure which is the more telling Rorschach blot test here. 😉

Let's not pretend any of us are in the right here.
 
#7,952
There's no armchair here. I've designed and built with my own hands hundreds of pieces of audio equipment,
starting at 12 years old. Including my own pcb designs. Including A/D and D/A converters way back in college.
Have you?
 
Last edited:
#7,953
billshurv said:
I don't think that anyone is naive enough to think that company white papers and blogs are anything but carefully crafted advertising?
Click to expand...

Bill, Of course ESS motivation to speak is similar to any company. However, when they do speak there is likely some truth to it. They may be concealing much more than they choose to say, of course.

My reason for interest in noise modulation is because there is still some poorly understood problem with many high loop gain amplifiers. If you would bother to visit here (if the chance should ever arise) I would be happy to show you. Its not hard to hear. Figuring out exactly what is going on has proven elusive for a long time though. When you hear it for yourself, and after the cognitive dissonance settles, I think you will agree.
 
#7,954
Markw4 said:
Its not the nicest looking electrostat room in town, if that's what matters to someone. You could have one similarly equipped as in the pic for maybe around $50k-$60k, if you shopped wisely. Outperforms some serious $200k systems. The one in the pic is assembled of used and diy components, and of prototype circuitry. Saves some $$$ as we all try to do with diy.
System sounds fabulous now, measures excellently, and more will happen as time goes on.

...and, with that you are back on my ignore list. Good day. 🙂
Click to expand...
I wasn't focusing on the looks of the system. I was going to respond to the "treated" aspect that you brought up. Perhaps you have a different definition of what (acoustically) treated room is. A small acoustic blanket (very limited effective range) on the back wall and carpeted floor (comb filtering) with bare walls and ceiling are not going to provide much of acoustically treated effects for a so called reference stereo setup. Calling it a treat room is a joke. Perhaps you sensed it and wanted to hide so now another claim of "ignore list". 🙄
 
#7,960
rayma said:
No armchair here, I've designed and built with my own hands hundreds of pieces of audio equipment,
starting at 12 years old. Including my own pcb designs. Including A/D and D/A converters way back in college.
Have you?
Click to expand...

Ray, I respect entirely your abilities as a electronics designer, and no I have not built my own ADC/DAC suite in the various projects I've worked on. And I think you do a great job in discussions helping folks with their projects!

Armchair philosophy/psychology are different domains than one's electronics background, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom