So DPH, how do you want me to be when the speedy opamp design philosophy I adopted from Jim W. gets hammered by the smarties with the calculator time and time on this forum. So far only JC gets what I talk about.
I also remember a Japanese born EE (can't remember his name but I do remember he was the guy that designed the "gain" Jfet system at the pre-bankruptcy MFSL) at Harman trashing my use of inductors for RIAA. Heck, he knew WAY more (so it seems) than me about preamp design. So if I were to follow convention I would have stopped right there and dumped inductor RIAA, right?
So I will cordially ask you this: if there is nothing left to gain, is that because you have actually, in earnest, tried it?
BTW Vinyl is the main way for most audiophiles to have an all analog listening experience, That is not compromising by any stretch.
I also remember a Japanese born EE (can't remember his name but I do remember he was the guy that designed the "gain" Jfet system at the pre-bankruptcy MFSL) at Harman trashing my use of inductors for RIAA. Heck, he knew WAY more (so it seems) than me about preamp design. So if I were to follow convention I would have stopped right there and dumped inductor RIAA, right?
So I will cordially ask you this: if there is nothing left to gain, is that because you have actually, in earnest, tried it?
BTW Vinyl is the main way for most audiophiles to have an all analog listening experience, That is not compromising by any stretch.
He found virtually nothing of interest in any modern devices, some eye openers for tube/low feedback folks. Did you read a different paper?
Well, it is compromising reproduction fidelity, no question about it.
There's nothing wrong with wanting an all-analog reproduction chain, and I enjoy my Sunday morning ritual of playing vinyl like many others.
But it will not give you the best possible transparent and accurate reproduction.
Jan
But Jan, Linear Audio has phono preamp designs. Shouldn't you publish those in something titled Not So Linear Audio then?
Well if you look deep enough, noting in audio is perfectly linear of course.
I chose the title Linear Audio to illustrate my personal goal in designing audio - trying to make it as linear as I can - as little as possible difference between what goes in and what comes out.
I realize and accept that sometimes you like the sound of one equipment or system better than another one, although knowing that in objective terms the other one is more accurate and transparent.But that is all in our human nature, how we are wired. We don't perceive like a scope or a THD analyzer.
I believe it is wrong, when you like one reproduction better than another, to conclude that therefor the equipment or system is better. That's nonsense, the two are different ways of appreciation, and failure to recognize that difference lies at the bottom of all these endless debates going nowhere.
I really like cruising a lazy sunset with a nice girl in my Audi convertible. It has a special meaning for me, related to how/when I got it, and I wouldn't want to trade it for any other car. But I would be daft to even think that therefor it is the very best car ever.
Jan
I chose the title Linear Audio to illustrate my personal goal in designing audio - trying to make it as linear as I can - as little as possible difference between what goes in and what comes out.
I realize and accept that sometimes you like the sound of one equipment or system better than another one, although knowing that in objective terms the other one is more accurate and transparent.But that is all in our human nature, how we are wired. We don't perceive like a scope or a THD analyzer.
I believe it is wrong, when you like one reproduction better than another, to conclude that therefor the equipment or system is better. That's nonsense, the two are different ways of appreciation, and failure to recognize that difference lies at the bottom of all these endless debates going nowhere.
I really like cruising a lazy sunset with a nice girl in my Audi convertible. It has a special meaning for me, related to how/when I got it, and I wouldn't want to trade it for any other car. But I would be daft to even think that therefor it is the very best car ever.
Jan
Last edited:
741 `playground `made by evil mad scientist lab.🙂
The XL741 Discrete Operational Amplifier | Evil Mad Scientist Laboratories
The XL741 Discrete Operational Amplifier | Evil Mad Scientist Laboratories
Attachments
I can't speak for others, but the phono preamp design I published there is damn linear. It will accurately amplify all of the defects of the signal presented to it.
Sir, You are sounding somewhat religous about the question.
How do your op amps sound?
-bruce
Its all been said a thousand times before... I hope all you folk that are dissing opamps are only using recorded material that has never before passed through any such devices.
You are... that's good then 😎 Kudos to you.
You are not. Hmmm... so you are saying then, that material that has been tainted in production by coming into contact with said devices of a certain type or a certain age suddenly sounds better when passed through yet more different devices or perhaps discrete circuitry. Now that may well be, and in fact agrees with my own experience, but what it does suggest is more of a synergy of combining different technologies to produce something that actually sounds rather good when combined together. And that's a totally different ball game to looking at single devices or circuits in isolation (imo, ymmv).
Carry on 😉
You are... that's good then 😎 Kudos to you.
You are not. Hmmm... so you are saying then, that material that has been tainted in production by coming into contact with said devices of a certain type or a certain age suddenly sounds better when passed through yet more different devices or perhaps discrete circuitry. Now that may well be, and in fact agrees with my own experience, but what it does suggest is more of a synergy of combining different technologies to produce something that actually sounds rather good when combined together. And that's a totally different ball game to looking at single devices or circuits in isolation (imo, ymmv).
Carry on 😉
Deja Vu, all over again??
Deja Vu.
All over again?
Seems like familiar territory.
Like people are lost? Lost in the woods, a common thing that happens is that people make big circles, ending up in the same place...
"...say doesn't that <rock><tree><field><view> look familiar..."
How many times, folks?
Look, this is simple enough, it breaks down like this
- Opamps, used properly, are indistinguishable, more than good enough for audio. (within reason, and used for appropriate applications, etc, etc..)
- Opamps, used properly, ought to be indistinguishable, but seem to have discernible sonic characteristics.
In the former case, there's nothing more to do.
The discussion ends, except for endlessly repeating the same things, and trying to convince or preach to those who take the latter position.
In which case, if the former position is adopted, THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO DO OR TO INVESTIGATE. End, fini, done, over.
So, IF you happen to take the former case, why not simply put the statement into your SIG FILE that appears on every post, and let those who want to delve into the matter, and waste their time looking for something that is a ghost, doesn't exist have at it? Otherwise the result is much like a bunch of zealots who keep saying the same things over and over, or a dog with a favorite bone.
Do the participants who take the former position really feel the burning NEED to do the same thing, make and have the same arguments over
multiple threads, going back in time, and now forward in time?
OR, maybe if you must make a mathematical or technical point, such as the "slew rate" argument, make the point WITHOUT the CONCLUSION ('...so it can't possibly sound different...')??
_-_-
Mooly's point is interesting, bears more investigation, but may or may not yield a conclusion that is the "linear" one expected... think it's a different thread...
Deja Vu.
All over again?
Seems like familiar territory.
Like people are lost? Lost in the woods, a common thing that happens is that people make big circles, ending up in the same place...
"...say doesn't that <rock><tree><field><view> look familiar..."
How many times, folks?
Look, this is simple enough, it breaks down like this
- Opamps, used properly, are indistinguishable, more than good enough for audio. (within reason, and used for appropriate applications, etc, etc..)
- Opamps, used properly, ought to be indistinguishable, but seem to have discernible sonic characteristics.
In the former case, there's nothing more to do.
The discussion ends, except for endlessly repeating the same things, and trying to convince or preach to those who take the latter position.
In which case, if the former position is adopted, THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO DO OR TO INVESTIGATE. End, fini, done, over.
So, IF you happen to take the former case, why not simply put the statement into your SIG FILE that appears on every post, and let those who want to delve into the matter, and waste their time looking for something that is a ghost, doesn't exist have at it? Otherwise the result is much like a bunch of zealots who keep saying the same things over and over, or a dog with a favorite bone.
Do the participants who take the former position really feel the burning NEED to do the same thing, make and have the same arguments over
multiple threads, going back in time, and now forward in time?
OR, maybe if you must make a mathematical or technical point, such as the "slew rate" argument, make the point WITHOUT the CONCLUSION ('...so it can't possibly sound different...')??
_-_-
Mooly's point is interesting, bears more investigation, but may or may not yield a conclusion that is the "linear" one expected... think it's a different thread...
Last edited:
THREAD: whats-wrong-opamp-rec-playback-signal-paths?
In fact I started that thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/everything-else/298382-whats-wrong-opamp-rec-playback-signal-paths.html#post4864825
In fact I started that thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/everything-else/298382-whats-wrong-opamp-rec-playback-signal-paths.html#post4864825
Let's hear some history from the horses mouth, as it were...
My Dad set some milestones in the radio broadcast industry, Aus and internationally.
When an experienced one speaks I respectfully listen, yourself included.
Dan.
"my life for aiur"
😀
jokes aside it is good that there is some redudancy so it is easy to someone to whom this thread is new to read it with no need to go trough all pages of thread,just few.
what i mean:
this stuff is too good to stay unseen by some people.
We're trying to pass audio bandwidth signals, right? So if there's infinitesimal distortion offered by passing an audio signal through your beloved ths6182 and there's infinitesimal distortion offered by passing an audio signal through an ne5532, (which is 450 V/us vs 9 V/us, a tidy difference of 50x) then that specific characteristic isn't what's causing a sound difference. Electrons don't care about your philosophy.
You have to choose the design compromises you see as most important to achieving your end goal. An inductor-based RIAA can certainly be made to work nicely. As can capacitor-based RIAAs--no surprises there. Certainly going to call upon different demands for the surrounding circuitry.
As to which is "better", electrons again don't care about your or my respective philosophies.
Perfection is the enemy of good enough. Which you're going to twist into "mediocrity". I can make a line stage (although my electronics tend to be more for test equipment at work) that passes an audio signal with sufficient linearity to challenge the best of test equipment (-100 to -120 dB and beyond if you start really working it). I have tried a number of listening tests that tell me my own sensitivity to distortions/etc is far, far, far beneath that (try Bill Waslo's sousaphone band tests! That ranges us in the -60 dB ballpark).
So I focus on other problems.
As Jan said, one may certainly enjoy the ever-living heck out of the medium. And that's great. But, as a storage medium, even over the relatively tiny audio bandwidth and DR, it's compromised. It absolutely has a great aesthetic appeal.
And "main way for most audiophiles" is either a "No true Scotsman"-type statement or patently wrong.
But that's all it is, history. The problems of 1975 not the problems of 2016. And not like JC hasn't published those same words many times on the blowtorch thread!
QED.
Are you really that myopic?
Want to talk mediocrity? Mediocrity is entrenching oneself in one's own view, oblivious to reality? And that intellectually lazy? You wish to blast Bear for his views, but then when your sacred cow is challenged, do the same. Goodness gracious.
Intellectually lazy? really? Do I need to link you to the reviews of my two products that, up until a year and a half ago was a company run by an army one (me). Those units in the wood case; all cut, glued, varnished, silked by me.
Every solder joint - me.
PCB layout, parts ordering, shipping, customer emails (a biggie BTW) - me.
All this allowed me to think and discover aspects most of you don't grasp.
This is my living. I have no pension, trust fund or investments.
That is partly how I came to where I am today. Because building the same circuit over and over and getting customer feedback pushed me to get to a place where the opamp became less and less of a sonic determiner thus shifting the main determiner of audio character to the passive parts and power supply.
So I guess if you want to call my 6 year path of working to optimize the inner universe of one phono preamp circuit "myopic". Well then that is a badge I will wear with pride.
Every solder joint - me.
PCB layout, parts ordering, shipping, customer emails (a biggie BTW) - me.
All this allowed me to think and discover aspects most of you don't grasp.
This is my living. I have no pension, trust fund or investments.
That is partly how I came to where I am today. Because building the same circuit over and over and getting customer feedback pushed me to get to a place where the opamp became less and less of a sonic determiner thus shifting the main determiner of audio character to the passive parts and power supply.
So I guess if you want to call my 6 year path of working to optimize the inner universe of one phono preamp circuit "myopic". Well then that is a badge I will wear with pride.
Last edited:
Wow, you can solder and write a good ad copy about how long it takes to optimise the flooby by ear.
By the way, what happened to Moroni to moronviii?
By the way, what happened to Moroni to moronviii?
No, I'm calling your religious adherence to a philosophy, regardless of whether it has any grounding in the realities of reproducing a signal, intellectually lazy and myopic.
Obviously your company is a labor of love and blood, sweat, and tears. I'm not discounting that in the least.
Anyhow, you are far more interested in pulling single words out of my writing and responding to them rather than reading the context in which they're place. Like, you know, the words immediately before and after them.
Obviously your company is a labor of love and blood, sweat, and tears. I'm not discounting that in the least.
Anyhow, you are far more interested in pulling single words out of my writing and responding to them rather than reading the context in which they're place. Like, you know, the words immediately before and after them.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.