Of course, but them you have to excite the mechanical "circuit", that tiny slab of silicon needs a LOT of force to create the strain.
Reminds me of the guy who would cut the tops off of TO-3 packages and put some kind of silicone on the silicon, which supposedly damped vibrations. Had a name like Benini or Bernini or?? (someone will know).
As Floyd Toole used to say, when he was more concerned about being polite in his role as a representative of Harman, "I concern myself with the 3dB effects"
As Floyd Toole used to say, when he was more concerned about being polite in his role as a representative of Harman, "I concern myself with the 3dB effects"
Reminds me of the guy who would cut the tops off of TO-3 packages and put some kind of silicone on the silicon, which supposedly damped vibrations. Had a name like Benini or Bernini or?? (someone will know).
As Floyd Toole used to say, when he was more concerned about being polite in his role as a representative of Harman, "I concern myself with the 3dB effects"
Bedini, one of the pioneers of the more "unusual" audio tweaks.
This apparent dissection of a DAC chip probably counts amongst the more "unusual" ones too (needs Flash) : The Memory Player
SAervice life in months at best if they did de-encapsulate the chip. I believe the Lynx uses a Crystal DAC so the whole story about bypassing hundreds of components is marginal at best. And the lack of a reconstruction filter can really play havoc with downstream electronics. But I'm sure the aliasing is musical.
Voltage output DAC chip http://www.cirrus.com/en/pubs/proDatasheet/cs4396.pdf . No I/V to bypass. . .
Hmmm. I dont recall saying what the topology or class of operation was... or even if it ss or tube. Assumptions will kill ya.
BTW -- cutting the tops off is a time honored way to see who really made the part.... logo is inside on the die. We found some companies who had a second source part number and it was just a remarked make from original mfr... so they didnt make it but sold it as thier own with same P/N with thier logo on the outside. When we called the original mfr, they said they knew it and didnt care for some reason.
-RNM
Last edited:
Have you been to Marco Polo's final destination city - the end of the Silk Road --- XIAN? Its fantastic! -RNM
Well THAT explains everything! Just ignore all the 'real' distortions?
It isnt enjoyable to me.... but is to a lot of people, I guess. I gave away all my LP's and associated equipment a long time ago. Never looked back, either.
I find that the almost direct access to the prestine master source via HD digital downloads to offer the most accurate sound. [Use your description of what Accurate means to you. lets not go there.] It gets rid of all those analog front end pieces used with LP's -- thank G*d ! The front end source and the speaker/room are the last frontiers where real big benifits can be made..... but we do have a few analog pieces in it but they can be made very very good now.
Thx - RNM
Last edited:
All distortions are "real" Richard. But some are less audible, some are more audible. Speaking of sources of most audible distortions, they are microphone preamps and power amps. Capsules and speakers produce another types of distortions, that are more ignorable by perception than microphone and power amps add.
The most benefit is to avoid them. Sit on backyard, listen to the creek, birds, insects, wind in the trees... It is incredible! More stereo than any stereo reproduction!
The most benefit is to avoid them. Sit on backyard, listen to the creek, birds, insects, wind in the trees... It is incredible! More stereo than any stereo reproduction!
Thank you Scott. I just try to understand the mechanism.
The first time was some decades ago that I was abusing an amp board (DH-101 clone) on the bench.
The drivers (TO-39) of the output mosfets were really singing (not within the normal operation envelope of the amp).
It turned to a habit to check for such a behavior when bench hard testing amps. Lots of arias.
George
Last edited:
Speaking of sources of most audible distortions, they are microphone preamps and power amps. Capsules and speakers produce another types of distortions, that are more ignorable by perception than microphone and power amps add.
The most benefit is to avoid them. Sit on backyard, listen to the creek, birds, insects, wind in the trees... It is incredible! More stereo than any stereo reproduction!
I somewhat agree.... speakers are the worst of the lot. An antique idea like the LP pushed as far as it can go.... looking for alternatives or ways to at least lower the distortions they produce -- since we cant actively control the dispersion or radiation pattern to make it sound more like real sound sources.
If we could start with - say - a five piece band with a speaker for each players' musical instrument with the polar pattern of a particular instrument being played - we could start to sound like a real band in the listening room.
Meanwhile -- Maybe electrostatic headphones and binorual recordings will come back and be done better this go around. -RNM
Last edited:
I'll never forget his patent on his "clarifier" gizmo which did nothing more than spin a CD in a static magnetic field.
In his patent, he literally claimed that doing so not only rearranged the data on the CD, but did data compression as well.
He "proved" this in a rather bizarre way.
He took a Kodak PhotoCD and copied a file off it to a directory on his hard drive. Then he spun it up in his "clarifier," and copied the same file to another directory on his hard drive.
Now, any sane person who wanted to see if there were any differences between the two files would simply run the old DOS file compare utility (fc.exe) on them. But what does Bedini do? He pulls each file into some other program and converts them to PostScript files.
Then he pulls the PostScript files into some text editor. He notes that the "clarified" file has fewer lines of text than the non-"clarified" file, hence, data compression. Then he runs a compare feature in the text editor and notes a number of differences between the two, hence it's moving the data around on the disc.
I tried this myself only I didn't use any "clarifier." I simply took the same file and saved it out twice as a PostScrip file into two different directories.
I first noted that the two files were different sizes. And when I ran file compare on them, there were some significant differences between the two.
Bottom line, the PostScript algorithm simply spits out different files even when you're doing it with the same file.
se
I was asked to consult on a product similar to the infamous Tice clock. The sales guy was wholly convinced that this thing (I think the brand was Electraclear or some such) worked wonders. I heard nothing (sighted test, and I would have been pleased to have heard anything). Others thought they could hear a change. Obviously I have defective hearing
I did my best to be polite but handed the guy over to another consultant. He looked at some of the data that was supposed to have proven that the gadget was doing something. It consisted of two data records from a CD that was played with and without the gizmo.
Dan S. pointed out that they were different all right, but they were taken from two different parts of the CD
You can't make this stuff up.
I did my best to be polite but handed the guy over to another consultant. He looked at some of the data that was supposed to have proven that the gadget was doing something. It consisted of two data records from a CD that was played with and without the gizmo.
Dan S. pointed out that they were different all right, but they were taken from two different parts of the CD
You can't make this stuff up.
George, It is almost impossible to believe a TO-39 transistor being microphonic enough to be audible in an ordinary sound field. You get a 3D stress tensor applied to the die from the can, die attach, and die system this gives rise to a 3D strain field that causes parameter and operating point changes. Put real numbers on these and you are way down in the noise. More likely the "engineer's fickle finger" removes parasitic oscillation especially in a metal can, the damping of the finger is certainly negligible.
Yeh, us techies are boring like that - we assume that people say what they mean and mean what they say. So every time you say something, I should assume that you really mean something different? That would certainly fit with what you have said so far, and the 'evidence' with which you back it up. Trouble is, it makes meaningful discussion quite impossible. At least it will save me some time, as I won't have to point out the errors or shortcomings in what you say; instead I will just assume that you don't mean it anyway.RNMarsh said:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.