Build a 40db non inverting gain stage. get a mess of different types of resistors (CC both new and NOS, MF - regular and thin film AND the nicer ones like vishay CMF series, CF, Bulk Foil, in the value you choose for the feedback and stopper. Start changing them out and listen. End of story. Message me once you have tried that.
You won't do it. You think it's a waste of time because it does not fit nice and neat in your little T&M box.
JC was right.
And I said,
No more food from me for you!
You won't do it. You think it's a waste of time because it does not fit nice and neat in your little T&M box.
JC was right.
And I said,
No more food from me for you!
Do you even pay attention to what's being written? Or is your commentary a form of control-c control-v whenever you hit a buzz word that triggers a response? Maybe you have a clever IFTTT script running.
Since context isn't a strong suit: Mr. Morinix claims that the quality of resistors and capacitors on an IC are one of the reasons that discrete component amplifiers achieve these "finer aspects of audio". I simply asked him to give some gravitas to that throwaway statement.
What's going on is that some people hear some things that are imagined, and also some poorly understood distortions that probably are real. When independent mastering engineers find out that they both (or several) hear the same distortion in a particular piece of gear, even one with good specs, there is a pretty good chance they are not all independently imagining the exact same thing. Mostly we are talking pretty subtle, but still detectable HF distortion, most of it probably above 8 or 10 kHz. As most of us here are old men, few have a chance of hearing this type of distortion first hand, so belief is hard to come by. Especially in the absence of adequate research to sort out the real from the imagined.
So what do people do who hear such distortion do in a case like that? They do what people usually do, they speculate about theories of cause and effect. They probably shouldn't do that, but that's human nature for you.
In addition, not all so-called Hi-Fi systems accurately reproduce the distortion well enough to make it distinguishable, even if good HF hearing ability remains. For people who have inadequate systems, they find no evidence for themselves in their own listening, even they believe it to be highly accurate.
Also, I have had the experience of training other people to hear distortion, as it seems to be a learned skill for most. We always start by listening to recorded cymbals. Often a parametric EQ is used to sweep through and examine the details of cymbal sound at different frequencies. Once those subtle details are learned, it starts to become easier to compare different equipment for distortion sounds. As skill is gained, it becomes possible to discern some distortion differences at somewhat lower frequencies.
For people who haven't tried this, or who can't do it now because of HF hearing loss, the easiest thing to to believe what their own ears tell them: there is no audible distortion. And then when they confirm that belief with similar believers, they become even more convinced of their position.
To make matters worse, psychologically, focusing attention on the disagreements, as occurs on the forum here, tends to increase polarization on both sides of the issue.
Last edited:
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. A glimmer of an answer. You are souless but NOT a monkey😉😀
Don't get too wrapped up in the Beatles aspect of that post. It was a relative comparison within the universe of Beatles pressings. The Beatles are actually an anomaly because of all the different masterings within the crazy world of audiophiledom.
Thought experiment.
A simple CFP for example -two transistors Q1 and Q2.
The CFP topology is operating with gain X3.
Q1 is n and Q2 is p.
Lets call this most basic defination of 'op amp'.
So you saying there is a time delay on the feedback?
If I remember correctly ECL actually has numerious 'emitters'.
Maybe this is the sub nano you see?
Broadly speaking, we agree, but whatever this HF distortion you are talking about is - it's not from the resistors or caps inside the IC...
At 10kHz this distortion would have to be massive to appear at the output of an op-amp like an LM4562 in a line level application.
What you're talking about is a broken implementation I'm afraid.
OK guys, now download and READ the AES paper from Heyser, especially his and others SUBJECTIVE opinion about the sound quality of this quaint amp. This is what he told me about 10 years after he wrote it, and where the idea that global negative feedback could be problematic.
You are writing my bio. The only thing is my hearing is totally finished at 13k and probably really only useful at nearer to 10k. YET I hear the HF stuff like a kick in the face.
As clarified below (and SY caught me out in a simplification), a DB protocol where both the DUT and the listener are characterized. Test structures where one is both blind and forced to make a choice will go a long ways towards controlling bias (as the human-under-test won't know which way to bias him/her self).
This is not nonsense! DPH, this is exactly why modders and DIYers search out things like paper caps and NOS audio transfomers.
Paper caps and NOS audio transformers are a bit of a cry from IC resistors and capacitors, no?
I'm not sure who has the attention deficit here. I asked a simple question:
"DPH, how exactly does "linearity" correlate to "musical enjoyment"? Do you have a formula or something?"
It didn't involve Mr. Morinix or a particular component. It's a general question on whether "linear" recording/mastering/reproduction is correlated to "musical enjoyment" and whether there is a formula for such correlation.
I hope that this round you won't ask me something silly like to first prove that Earth ain't flat.
This is all so very old hat, such perception issues are known for decades, but there are still lots of people who don't understand it. And, let's face it, have no intention to educate themselves and run the risk of - gasp - facing the necessity to have to change their mind!
Jan
I'm genuinely wondering how we're talking so far past each other. Am I reading the same thread as everyone else? I'd like to think the points I'm making are succinctly placed and limited in scope.
How linearity and musical enjoyment correlate has never been the thrust of my stance, nor have I made any claims to that question, which seems wildly tangential to the topic. Or at least presumptive that many of the claimed interventions or rationalizations are first audible. To be clear: I am sitting here trying to gauge the remotest possibility of audibility of some folks claimed "reasons X sounds different to Y"; when that much is better defined, one can move on to greater ambitions.
How linearity and musical enjoyment correlate has never been the thrust of my stance, nor have I made any claims to that question, which seems wildly tangential to the topic. Or at least presumptive that many of the claimed interventions or rationalizations are first audible. To be clear: I am sitting here trying to gauge the remotest possibility of audibility of some folks claimed "reasons X sounds different to Y"; when that much is better defined, one can move on to greater ambitions.
Not when you are after soft compression and slight bandwidth limiting with a sprinkle of distortion from things like capacitor dielectric absorption. It really helps get a euphonic effect for things like jazz vocals and less than perfect vintage recordings. My moving coil head amp does similar effects by user adjustable transistor loading of the cartridge.
Robert, those are very (LARGE) measurable differences, that can be well characterized (the kind I say are readily captured by anyone with ARTA and a decent sound card). If you like that sound, that's all well and good (I mean that with all sincerity), but that's big difference from claims that having gigantic slew rate is why XYZ reproduces micro-transients.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.