Yes, really nasty "dead-zone" crossover distortion is in a class of its own, and of course cited in ye olde days as an inherent shortcoming of solid state.
Brad Plunkett told me about a tech at UREI who was adjusting the quiescent current on their power amps up to much-too-high levels. When asked why he did this when the nominal bias was specified at considerably lower levels, he proudly declared that it was because it made the distortion lower. I guess he kept his job.
Yes. And the gm-doubling distortion which Self and others decry is a factor in total distortion, but much more benign. And as well it can be compensated for.
Class D is a different can of worms, somewhat.
There's even an easier way- have a switch in series with the output that flicks on and off randomly.
*Talks about cutting edge audio technology all day long online*
*Can't understand why someone would be so inconsiderate to try and bog down his boss-*** Windows 98 machine with a bulldozing 256MB of ram and slamming 56k connection*
My little essay for the day.
I have an idea, let's just admit to ourselves that there are pitfalls in all forms of listening tests. None are perfect and we can all discuss the failings till the end of the world. If indeed we make points on anecdotal listening as opposed to a structured test, we should be guarded and not make absolute statements unless we are very sure, and even then we should not speak in absolutes. Observations are simply that and we have a right to express them, but with respect.
I hate the instant reviewer syndrome, often brought about by shoot-outs and other ad-hoc listening games, and when I voice my view that they are stupid and a waste of time, then they smile and say it is just fun and entertainment (yet they give me a scoring sheet?), but to me they are wrong and just plain boring (I give the paper back blank). Why do so many audiophiles just ache to become reviewers? It's like they are in training constantly, a secret ambition coming from reading magazines? They can walk into a room foreign to them and tell you everything that is wrong about your system. We have all met the type, right? Me, I just keep my mouth shut and let them rant. Just smile.
But... I do feel that after listening to a piece of equipment in a familiar room/milieu and a system, over a period of time, that I can get to know it pretty well in that context. Sometimes I hear thinks straight away, but the ultimate test and the only one that matters, is whether I can live with that box of whatever it is. Price means nothing, able to peek or not peek is irrelevant, it either works for me and gives me ongoing pleasure, or it just doesn't work for me. If it works for somebody else, good luck to them. But I am by nature a careful and conservative listener and also in stating what I hear. I prod rather than push. Whenever anybody comes here for a listen, I never ask "what do you think" and just keep playing music and talk about the music, sooner or later they will tell me. Any test that requires me to ask that question is to me flawed - the listener should never be put on the spot. My listener soon sees that the question is not coming and then just relaxes - this simple policy has stood the test of time - I want them to be perfectly comfortable when they express their views or opinions.
It really isn't that complicated.
So, stop being a reviewer and stop asking 'performance' questions. If what they hear takes them somewhere nice, then you have accomplished what the end game is about.
Actually, I have several projects to keep me occupied.
First, there's my own power amp project I have been working on for quite some time. I got what I could from it on paper, it's time now to check it out in real life, on a live sample. I'm hoping for the best, but you never know until you actually try it out.
Then comes Andrew's preamp. I am extremely satisfied with my Luxman C-03, but again, I need to try Andrew's take on he subject.
Lastly, there's Andrew's CFA amp. Just by looking at it, I'd say it's tantalizingly simple and makes a lot of sense to me, and I'm curiouous enough to go for it. Since my speakers are relatively efficient at 92 dB/2.84V/1m, and since they work in a relatively small room, I know from experience with the Marantz 170DC power amp rated at about the same power (85W/8) that such power is really quite enough for me under real world conditions. 2016 should be fun.
Yes, sorry Scott. (Recordings were made 10 to 15 of September. Synchronizing all these recordings, trimming them for exactly equal length, doing the FFTs and arranging the data takes a lot of time.)
I should have made a reference to the relevant posts.
Here is the story:
My big mouth had made a comment there:
This generated a series of posts
So I had to do some measurements to find how wrong I may have been.
I thought that it would be easy to confirm some numbers but it’s not.
At least I confirmed that SY was (I am sorry to say this
but it’s true) correct.As for the electrical to mechanical efficiency (reciprocity as you say) of the cartridge, I don’t know how to set up a good test for this.
I only did the following with the AT-110E:
Left channel loaded with 100k, Right channel loaded with variable loading to examine damping imposed on monitored L channel (record content: music)
As you see on the first attachment, there is almost no damping with this cartridge. The trend line shows a miniscule effect.
But I would say there is no damping at all. This is why I say this:
Prior to that test, in the beginning of this whole trial, I had I run the same musical track twenty one times (but with different loading and no buffer) for to check the repeatability performance. I had the software monitor the max peak on each recording. Plot of these figures and the statistics is on the second attachment.
George
Attachments
Last edited:
Exactly so. In addition to which I actually have three systems at hand to try it out on, and two amps to compare it with. Three, if I count my regular amp (an H/K PA2400) which is exactly 3 dB more powerful (rated at 170W/8, maximum current bursts at 60 Amps or more). I am curious, that's the simple truth, and my nose suggests that's a good attempt. And my nose is usually right, very few misses.
The problem is not with uploads, where the server can render on the fly, but when an image is linked. Normally the webserver considers this to be a browser problem to deal with. Opera (which appears to be around 3% market share although hard to tell these days) of course has its smart proxy which can chomp the file for you. Personally not going to run Opera just for one website!
There are ways to deal with this, but its not trivial. If I have missed the obvious and it is trivial you will have much admiration (at least from me).
My little essay for the day.
I have an idea, let's just admit to ourselves that there are pitfalls in all forms of listening tests. None are perfect and we can all discuss the failings till the end of the world. If indeed we make points on anecdotal listening as opposed to a structured test, we should be guarded and not make absolute statements unless we are very sure, and even then we should not speak in absolutes. Observations are simply that and we have a right to express them, but with respect.
I hate the instant reviewer syndrome, often brought about by shoot-outs and other ad-hoc listening games, and when I voice my view that they are stupid and a waste of time, then they smile and say it is just fun and entertainment (yet they give me a scoring sheet?), but to me they are wrong and just plain boring (I give the paper back blank). Why do so many audiophiles just ache to become reviewers? It's like they are in training constantly, a secret ambition coming from reading magazines? They can walk into a room foreign to them and tell you everything that is wrong about your system. We have all met the type, right? Me, I just keep my mouth shut and let them rant. Just smile.
A surprisingly large number of pople are unable to vocalize their impressions, and I think (but cannot prove) that almost just as many cannot express their objections, things like tonal balance. Reviewers can, that's a part of their job. This makes them somehow superior to "common folk", since where one person stutters, they hand out their opinion. Like they have something others do not. It is however implicit that they have more experience, which is not always so, and it is understood that they can avoid their personal preferences, which I know to be untrue. I was actually a reviewer for three years or so in a local audio magazine and was so dismayed by their personal preferences which governed their jury duty I gave it up, and created my own FM radio show. It allowed me to say things like "This is a decent amp for the money, not the kind of sound I look for, but it is still decent".
The general public has a surprisingly long memory, and 12 years later, people still ask me sometimes why I quite that show. It never fails to surprise me when they say they remember my voice, especially so as I am not at all happy with my voice. Yet, for reasons I still fail to understand, you do get an auro of a very knowledgable person and soon become something of a local celebrity. And some people find that very alluring. But some of them actually get a hard-on kick from it. Yet too many are on an out-and-out cruisade for whatever is their ego trip, usually their idea of good sound.
I couldn't agree more. But that's one half of it, you also have to have the guts and integrity to dare topublically say that a product from a very famous and damn expensive company is not nearly worth its price, and much less its fame. I did that with products from McIntosh, which I called an average sounding amp at a way above average price, and an Accuphase model of an integrated amp left me wondering who would be the suckers paying for it, as it sounded just like a better looking and admittedly better made Technics offering. This doesn't happen very often, but it does happen. And you either have the balls to say it out loud, or you don't because of economic constraints If they suddenly stop advertising, do not believe for a minute that your audience won't connect all the right dots and reach realistic conclusions.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.