Ok, here it goes. Which opamp based amplifiers you listened to and didn't like at all the experience?
This is dangerous. After Denial comes the Anger stage. I'd better make myself scarce.
SY is being accurate. No stones just insults, aspersions, barbs, slander and every negative text that almost follows the rules.
The truth is J.C. Uses measurements extensively. He wants to see no measurable higher order harmonic distortion. Listening is a final check. He derived his measurement goals based on listening by himself and others whose opinions he values.
Last edited:
So you have completely changed tack? What happened to subjective differences between two versions of an album.
FWIW I made an op-amp phono stage using AD846 and I didn't follow the design rules so it was noisy and unstable. All my fault in my rush to try out current mode stuff without any suitable test equipment. Was before I knew better. My current thick film hybrid based phono is very pleasing.
FWIW I made an op-amp phono stage using AD846 and I didn't follow the design rules so it was noisy and unstable. All my fault in my rush to try out current mode stuff without any suitable test equipment. Was before I knew better. My current thick film hybrid based phono is very pleasing.
Well considering you missed my point from your first interjection into said altercation, I think you're chasing a ghost. I've been countering you on that wild tangent since and you *still* haven't grasped. Initially I thought you were playing along with my joke.
The very comment you initially quoted of mine was made to point out the ridiculous presumption that CERN must instead listen for a Higgs Boson rather than *visually* look at the ensemble of their extremely digested data. This was in contradiction to Abrax's assertion that he didn't trust people's eyes with regards to measurements. Satire.
To give you further context, Abraxalito has made some very poorly formed theories that he especially likes to unleash on newer/less experienced user on this forum (which sends the poor users into a dizzy as opposed to following datasheets/common convention where they have a greater chance of success). I've asked him to demonstrate the magnitudes of the effects he's proposing. Pretty sure he's still trying to get a dig at me for those contradictions. I'll admit to my pettiness in the matter, but stand by my initial requests for measurements. I'm absolutely sure that he has a different take on the matter. In either case, I can't understand what points he's trying to make anymore.
Last edited:
Can't parse this sentence, missing verb perchance?
The word used for poorly formed theory is hypothesis.
Do you have stats to support your 'especially' here? Curious to see the data.
Your 'pretty sure' is based on what evidence?
Thanks for not overturning my hypothesis that you were indeed being moved by pettiness. I think I followed up with a question about what particular measurements you were after and why, but my memory could be faulty. So I'll ask that again here - what measurements were you after and why? Most particularly the emphasis is on 'why?' as I've asked you plenty of times for justifications and gotten tumbleweeds it seems.
Fooled by the specs? IIRC it is obsolete now, it was an attempt to make a precision CFA with what some of us jokingly call Gothic design (i.e. extra cascodes = flying buttresses, etc.).
More ignored all the dire warnings about layout and decoupling and dead bugged it on a ground plane using parts bin components. We were all young and stupid once.
Can't say any with a "didn't like at all experience". BTW is it fair to actually open the hood and use engineering experience to try and figure out what is wrong or is it, "3-legs good 8-legs bad"?
A) Waslo's Sousaphone band down what -80db can't be discerned under typical music why? Perhaps because of two things - one it is uncorrelated to the main signal. The problems at least that I hear are directly correlated to specific factors in the soundfield.
It is really tough to hear just hum in a system that is one heck of lot louder than -80dB when music is playing. I'm talking about harmonically rich 120Hz non sinusoidal wavforms.
B) Mooly's attempt was valiant, but flawed - I pointed out why back when he posted it. Perhaps re-visit?
Get your tests right BEFORE you draw conclusions.
I go one step farther, most of the "valid tests" that I've read are perfectly valid for the specific test conditions but make the mistake of drawing conclusions that are then generalized. (not saying there is nothing to be learned...)
_-_-
Buzzy bees... buzzy bees.
I've engaged because I find it interesting to see where people stand & their logic & not "to determine something defensibly".
Although I appreciate the strides science has made in developing our current & limited understanding of the physical world, I don't attach any more significance to it than is justified - simply a tool to aid in understanding certain portion of the world - a small portion.
If every observation has to be 'proven defensibly' using current science then it severely curtails the possibility of starting any investigations or making progress in this hobby. We know that science has it's limitations & that it's tools also have their limitations. To think that only that which is 'determined defensible' is allowed is pure scientism at it's most overt.
OK you are aware that you are biased towards null results, you have done listening tests which have given you null results (not surprising) & you are influenced by the null results of others. Have these others 'proven defensibly' that their biases were accounted for in these 'more carefully controlled tests'? Do you have a link to these tests?
No, it means that if you are submitting others to scrutiny, you too are open to scrutiny & your possible biases & assumptions examined. We can conclude from your admission of null biasing that you would likely be rejected at the pre-selection stage of any adequately controlled & administered listening test. So, in regards to listening your admission disqualifies you just as much as anyone with admitted hearing issues would be.
That's simply inapplicable to this hobby - it's nothing like your field of work. You said it earlier, 'remotely scientific' is the usual qualifying criteria on audio forums. Lots of words wasted over the usual 'extraordinary claims...... etc', lots of posing for one's peers.
I don't believe there would be any profit in this
Last edited:
I'm trying to be flexible. 😀
I've already told you - feel free to design your own experiment where one team examines the measurements, the other team does the subjective assessment, then the results are compared. But where they don't peek at each other's stuff - like the stereophile folks that you mentioned.
Serious question - what made you pick exactly the AD846, amongst other choices? (with the promise that I won't comment on your answer - unless, of course, you formulate it as an insult or something).
Can this be quantified? say on a scale of 1 - 10, just how stoned does he actually get & is it a high end stone?
Sure. I see nothing wrong with measuring in order to make sure that there aren't any nasties hidden there ( like a 2MHz "carrier" lol).
Simple. People started talking about current mod opamps in the late 80s so I thought, in the arrogance of youth I could just lash something up and it would be great.
Are we back at the "if it can't be quantified it doesn't exist" argument? 🙄
For a subjective assessment I recommend the Blowtorch thread. Epic stuff, will take a few days to go through all of it.
Of posts.Wow! you can go through all of the Blowtorch John's Curls thread in only a few days.........Respect! 
The adamance of folks against putting their perceptions up against any kind of scrutiny remains a source of amusement. Too much to lose plane and simple.
I've played with these, but the ones I sampled oddly measured slightly worse than the NE5532s I had on the bench at the time (simple test of THD+N in a gain of 101, 2k ohm load). It was likely due to the variation in broadband noise though, maybe I had a lower noise NE5532 than the usual. Overall though I agree, not a bad part. The combination of low voltage and current noise had me thinking it might be good for a MM phono pre-amp.
Mr. Wurcer beat me to the punch on the internal IC components. These aren't built with just MOS caps and diffused resistors anymore...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.