I agree it's completely fine & we can just accept the relatively fickle nature of our perceptions & live with them - we do so every day & get by just fine relying on them.
But some people seem to want definitive answers & that was who my question was addressed to & I wondered how it could be progressed?
Last edited:
Was one run on AC power & another run battery powered - I didn't pick this up?
So true
.Sometimes, participating at a car race, you are in a state of grace. In perfect harmony. Gives-you more luck to win when everything is so easy and fluid.
Same thing when you mix a tune in studios. Same thing when you are a musician, a writer ...
Sometimes, you are fighting against yourself. No help from the sky. Its affraiting and exhausting. And you have no right to show your weakness ;-)
It is the same thing with electronic design: Sometimes, you just plug your new device for the first listening session, and ...YESSS !
it is for those moments of grace that we continue.
What's makes a professional is just it will not fall below a certain level and that is for what we are paid: our worst moments.
(My life ;-)
You asked: "So what is the way forward ?"
To continue to dig and practice to make our worst moments better and better ?
Our moments of grace do not belong to us.
Last edited:
C, R core
or toroidal transformers with a screen between primary and secondary ?
(The crap infiltrates cunningly everywhere ;-)
BTW: I had seen on your web site you experimented a CFA power amp. Any conclusion ? Did-you tried some CFA integrated circuits in your (nice) preamps ? Found any noticeable differences ?
Well you fellers can second guess yourselves all you want......the notes I took while doing the comparisons say C1 is the most true sounding......not by a little, but highly noticeable at least to me. If psychoacoustics is involved it’s because it’s a more believable rendition to start with, which i’m assuming is the difference between the AD797 and AD744 being as all else was equal?
Bob, to me, your comments - you were the first one who tried the new files - were right on the spot and in accordance with circuit solution and parameters. I started to take your impressions seriously '-). Yes, AD797 is slightly better for audio than AD744 and to me it is the most transparent opamp that I have ever tested.
Last edited:
Thanks Pavel,
It’s a constant battle here trying to describe the things I hear, I know Dan is a little off the wall (sorry Dan! I mean no offense) but he’s one of the few people that take what I say seriously and is willing to help.
Well maybe when I’m comfortable enough to build something from scratch I’ll build that preamp!
What is it’s difficulty level and total cost of components (estimated)?
It’s a constant battle here trying to describe the things I hear, I know Dan is a little off the wall (sorry Dan! I mean no offense) but he’s one of the few people that take what I say seriously and is willing to help.
Well maybe when I’m comfortable enough to build something from scratch I’ll build that preamp!
What is it’s difficulty level and total cost of components (estimated)?
Bob, it was never meant as a project for sale and it is rather an instrument than an audio component
. However, it is possible to have some view about the layout and difficulty - I think it is not difficult at all. It uses both through hole and SMD opamp chips, that means that the PCB is not optimized. It was built in 2014 and several opamps were tested at different circuit positions. I am not taking more excuses and I am attaching some photos of the thing. I have no budget calculation but I do have a BOM of PCB components. The most expensive part would be the stepped attenuatorDACT audio attenuators
BTW, has anybody noticed that PRE#1 has a stepped attenuator and PRE#2 has blue Alps? I do not think this is a minor difference and it was mentioned in the simplified schematics posted.
Attachments
OK, thanks - I didn't think I had read about battery power on any device.
I believe Tournesol's point was that leakage currents are pernicious & will find any avenue to infiltrate the system. You seem to have gone to a lot of effort to avoid ground loops but RCA connection from DAC to preamp & onwards to amp Why not just use the laptop actually on battery power rather than "perform same as when notebook is battery powered"? Are you sure you are ensuring this? What are the effects of leakage current & how do they show up in measurements? How do you use measurements to ascertain they are minimised/eliminated in your setup?
Not being critical just trying to understand your process
Last edited:
A grounded shield between primary & secondary will prevent capacitive coupling & current leakage.
No, that's not what you hear. What you all like about Claire#1 is the low noise floor. AD744 is actually special at LF distortionwise. Around -130dB if i'm not mistaken. Low noise floor have that unique sound, like transparency, black background. Extreme example is the ACA#1. Not few found their holly grail with this 'awful' amplifier.
I think this is the second time, it's not appreciated Bob especially coming from you when I have been willing to and endeavoring to help you.
Yes, it can be difficult to be taken seriously around here with all the egos and self proclaimed experts who commonly judge but without examination, ie performing suggested experiments themselves.
If you want to use the Hint as power amp only (ie bypass the Hint preamp) you could build a simple box with standard volume control or switched volume control or switched attenuator.
If the cable connecting from the vol control to the Hint inputs is short ie low capacitance you should have no audible problems running such passive control without opamp/bufffering stages.
Another approach is to use a source with variable output level....what sources do you intend using ?.
Dan.
No way, johnego. No way.
It is all about distortion (IM) and microdynamic (attacks of percussions). I have enough experience of analog magnetic tapes and noisy electronic (remember I'm too an old sound engineer) to know what is noise, hiss, hum, and how to hide-them.
120dB ? Fantastic. But remember instruments are recorded with microphones, often with a lot of electric guitars in the studios.... !!!! Mix often done on analog mixing desk with hundreds of Opamps like TL072 or NE5532.
No offence intended, but, reading this kind of comments on forums, I often feel that many people are really off-ground.
Last edited:
) Yes, i know (what i can hear). I was just guessing about the strength of Claire#1 that you might like. That's what i like most about it. But they are related so i think you are right. Distortion is one of the things that i can hear stand out about #1 (compared to #2. i didn't download and pay attention to #3)AD744 is -130dB at LF. That's i think what makes it special even tho old and cheap. And being DC precision too.
But hey, you're the one who is not convinced that 0.00001% vs 0.0003% should be audible. Is that why you mentioned IMD? But IMD will not too far away from THD. Why, you're not surprised that I don't look confused?
)
Last edited:
PMA, yes, 50 or 60dB worse. IT IS IN your samples signal.
Do-you think you will hear any difference, adding 0.008dB of pink or white noise to an existing pink noise ?
Noise don't change the character of a sound, unless some IM at work.
Happily. If not, no mix should be possible.
More than this, in absolute, the lack of background noise is unbearable. Just spend an afternoon in a anechoic chamber without a radio.
Last, if too much background noise is boring, a little helps to get a good mark with reviewers in the section "decay" or "sound stage". ;-)
For the anegdote, I was very embarrassed, during my mixings, at the beginnings of digital, by the absence of hiss. It was as if we had removed the foundations of a house.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.