I usually try to keep my reviewing activities separate from my contributions on the hi-fi forums. However, I recently reviewed a product that had such an effect on me that I wanted to talk about it with other chip amp builders. You can read the review here .
That product is called the Resurrector, and is the invention of hi-fi designer, Marek Klimczak from Poland. Marek doesn't speak English which makes communication a bit difficult so I have already started a Resurrector page on Decibel Dungeon to try and bridge the language barrier. And this thread will hopefully keep all Resurrrector discussion in one place.
The Resurrector thrilled me as much as building my first Gainclone, doing everything that Marek claimed for it. Now I look forward to others trying it, and hearing what they have to say. I'm in no way connected with Marek, other than as mentioned above but I would like to say here that the Resurrector is a serious hi-fi product, and not a hoax or Ebay scam.
I will update the Resurrector page at DD as necessary, but if there's anything not covered there, please ask here.
That product is called the Resurrector, and is the invention of hi-fi designer, Marek Klimczak from Poland. Marek doesn't speak English which makes communication a bit difficult so I have already started a Resurrector page on Decibel Dungeon to try and bridge the language barrier. And this thread will hopefully keep all Resurrrector discussion in one place.
The Resurrector thrilled me as much as building my first Gainclone, doing everything that Marek claimed for it. Now I look forward to others trying it, and hearing what they have to say. I'm in no way connected with Marek, other than as mentioned above but I would like to say here that the Resurrector is a serious hi-fi product, and not a hoax or Ebay scam.
I will update the Resurrector page at DD as necessary, but if there's anything not covered there, please ask here.
Nuuk, surely you realise that the claims of "reducing the electro-motive force" are rubbish? EMF is nothing more nor less than another term for voltage, and while lowering the voltage fed to a speaker will certainly reduce the current ( I = V / R ), it will do so at the expense of power and thus volume.
If, perhaps, it is supposed to do something with back-emf....well, no, that's an intrinsic problem, and unless he's rewritten the laws of physics recently, simply doesn't explain anything.
To step through it - when a current flows through the voice coil, a magnetic field is created, which, in interacting with the permanent magnet of the speaker, causes the coil, and thus the cone, to move. As the coil moves through the magnetic field, an EMF is induced in the coil in accordance with Lenz's law, and as a result opposes the voltage causing the motion. This is "back-emf", and among other things, it stops motors from accelerating infinitely.
If he's "solved" the back-emf "problem", he has a long and happy life ahead of him in designing over-unity devices.
I don't deny that this circuit is doing SOMETHING, but the explanation you have accepted is nonsense.
If, perhaps, it is supposed to do something with back-emf....well, no, that's an intrinsic problem, and unless he's rewritten the laws of physics recently, simply doesn't explain anything.
To step through it - when a current flows through the voice coil, a magnetic field is created, which, in interacting with the permanent magnet of the speaker, causes the coil, and thus the cone, to move. As the coil moves through the magnetic field, an EMF is induced in the coil in accordance with Lenz's law, and as a result opposes the voltage causing the motion. This is "back-emf", and among other things, it stops motors from accelerating infinitely.
If he's "solved" the back-emf "problem", he has a long and happy life ahead of him in designing over-unity devices.
I don't deny that this circuit is doing SOMETHING, but the explanation you have accepted is nonsense.
Thanks for your observations.
As I said, the language barrier is a problem and I really don't want to get bogged down in semantics. They cause enough problems on these forums as it is.
Perhaps when more people have tried this device, we will arrive at what it actually is doing. But the message I want to get across is that you don't need to know how it works, you don't need to be an electronics boffin, the Resurrector works. How I don't know but it does. I'll wager most chip amp builders don't really understand how the things make music, but they can here that they do, and that's enough for them.
And obviously, with the inventor not wishing to give away his secret, details of how it does work will be obscure regardless of the language barrier. 😉
PS It is not back-EMF he has solved, that was a misunderstanding which unfortunately didn't get edited out.
As I said, the language barrier is a problem and I really don't want to get bogged down in semantics. They cause enough problems on these forums as it is.
Perhaps when more people have tried this device, we will arrive at what it actually is doing. But the message I want to get across is that you don't need to know how it works, you don't need to be an electronics boffin, the Resurrector works. How I don't know but it does. I'll wager most chip amp builders don't really understand how the things make music, but they can here that they do, and that's enough for them.
And obviously, with the inventor not wishing to give away his secret, details of how it does work will be obscure regardless of the language barrier. 😉
PS It is not back-EMF he has solved, that was a misunderstanding which unfortunately didn't get edited out.
I'd be interested to see if quantifiable tests could identify what it is that's changing. Obviously, switching in a largely different lump of circuit IS going to cause a night-and-day difference, and I'd like to know whether that difference shows up in THD, frequency response, phase shift etc.
Also, have you considered producing a dummy load of known resistance and inductance to simulate the impedance of the "phantom" speakers?
Also, have you considered producing a dummy load of known resistance and inductance to simulate the impedance of the "phantom" speakers?
I guess my best reply is that for those that require 'proof' of what is happening with the Resurrector, the solution is to buy one and test it in which ever way you think will prove or dis-prove that it works.
I consider my review to be nothing more than an endorsement that it works for me, ie that it makes the sound much more satisfying; and an inducement to those with more technical knowledge to take a look at it.
I came to DIY hi-fi rather late in my life to start learning all the electronics theory that goes with it. But I haven't ever lost sight of the goal, ie enjoyment of the music, and that's what I have based my review on. 😉
I consider my review to be nothing more than an endorsement that it works for me, ie that it makes the sound much more satisfying; and an inducement to those with more technical knowledge to take a look at it.
I came to DIY hi-fi rather late in my life to start learning all the electronics theory that goes with it. But I haven't ever lost sight of the goal, ie enjoyment of the music, and that's what I have based my review on. 😉
Nuuk said:
The description in the review sounds like an amplifier whereby the speaker and the input circuit don't share a common ground reference--like Super Symmetry, Balance&Bridge, and those types, except that I can see its not a bridged amp.
Since I can see that the amplifier isn't BTL, and assume that it does use negative feedback, then I have a question on how the speaker return's very forceful AC signal was passed only into the power supply 0v and nowhere else, in order to avoid applying gain to it OR how a cancellation was arranged for the unwanted AC signal of the speaker's return line so that it doesn't conduct "speaker return AC" into input star ground?
Well, that was the question I had while reading the article. 😉
Ted205 said:
It's an addition to a chip amp circuit, together with the addition of some phantom drivers.
i'm abit confused, i'm abit hassy this morning 😉.
Whats the idea behind it what is it supposed to do out of the box ?
Whats the idea behind it what is it supposed to do out of the box ?
Ted205 said:
Well perhaps you could wait till you are a little less "hassy" and then read the review and the article on DD that I spent quite a long time writing. 😉
Is the phantom speaker used ( intentionally or otherwise ) as a microphone. What happens if you tap the cone, any output from the main amp ?
Mooly said:
Yes, you do hear it through the main speakers when you tap one of the phantom drivers.
Mooly said:
Well your guess would be as good as mine. 😉
What we need here is a(nother) brave soul to try it.
'Resurrector was the answer to a chip amp builder's prayers'
Excellent news indeed. And just in time for Christmas
Still curious: what were they praying for? Good sound from a chip?
Excellent news indeed. And just in time for Christmas
Still curious: what were they praying for? Good sound from a chip?
Hi Nuuk
I think the Resurrector popped up very briefly on here a few months ago, I seem to remember the photo.
It certainly seems to have made a good impression with you, looking forward to seeing how this develops.
John
I think the Resurrector popped up very briefly on here a few months ago, I seem to remember the photo.
It certainly seems to have made a good impression with you, looking forward to seeing how this develops.
John
Nick -
Unless I'm missing something, the Resurrector doesn't exist on the web, and definitely not on ebay. It'll be difficult for anyone to try it if it's unavailable. Perhaps a link of some type, to the inventor or his webpage, if he has one, would be in order. - Pat
Unless I'm missing something, the Resurrector doesn't exist on the web, and definitely not on ebay. It'll be difficult for anyone to try it if it's unavailable. Perhaps a link of some type, to the inventor or his webpage, if he has one, would be in order. - Pat
- Status
- Not open for further replies.