Hi John,
Will Behold have an exhibit room of their own? Is that where your new amp will be shown? I'll look forward to seeing it (and you).
Cheers,
Bob
Hi Chris,
Interesting observations about the input stages, especially with regard to base current in the BJT designs. I always favor the JFET input stages for this among several reasons, even though the input-referred voltage offset is typically greater. DC servos fix this quite well.
Given that one likes JFETs at the front, and given the poor availability of dual p-channel devices, the way I naturally lean is toward the unipolar JFET input stage.
The complementary input stage was also attractive because it was visually symmetrical AND because it made it straightforward to drive a push-pull complementary VAS. With the unipolar input stage, you have to do rail-rail level shifting in some way to drive a push pull VAS. This is not that difficult and does not compromise the sound quality if it is done right, but some attention to detail is needed.
Of course, there are many who just plain forego the push-pull VAS and use one with a current source load. I think this approach is inferior, although it can be made to work well.
Cheers,
Bob
Well, I made 2 separate attempts to input earlier, but I just gave up trying to convey something about input stages or the use of output coils.
For me, it is just too difficult, if every word is parsed, every design idea is challenged, every 'fact' either in the present, or in the past is thought to be a product of my imagination.
I do wish to point out what I find here, on this thread.
I find that most of my critics have little real experience with amplifier design that has actually been accepted in the audio marketplace.
I also find that many here have little or no understanding of the history of audio design, and the tradeoffs made over the decades, and why. Heck, most of you don't know where most of the designs that you play with, were developed, or why.
Now, if you want to know more about where these designs came from, and what we are working on, today, I'm your man. However, if I can't make any headway due to parsing and quibbling, then so be it.
For me, it is just too difficult, if every word is parsed, every design idea is challenged, every 'fact' either in the present, or in the past is thought to be a product of my imagination.
I do wish to point out what I find here, on this thread.
I find that most of my critics have little real experience with amplifier design that has actually been accepted in the audio marketplace.
I also find that many here have little or no understanding of the history of audio design, and the tradeoffs made over the decades, and why. Heck, most of you don't know where most of the designs that you play with, were developed, or why.
Now, if you want to know more about where these designs came from, and what we are working on, today, I'm your man. However, if I can't make any headway due to parsing and quibbling, then so be it.
Do you believe in a virtual persuasion? I do not think so. Those who criticize have usually absolutely no experience with high end. They can never be persuaded in a virtual space, and they will not have a possibility of serious comparisons. This is all useless. There is the one and only big advantage - the virtual space enables people from different parts of the world to communicate. On expense of problems we can see every day.
Which thread are you talking about PMA?
I do not see here, in this thread, any criticism regarding design ideas. What I saw, and what I participated in, was some idea as if PIM is visible on the picture as a non-harmonic content, that is totally wrong. However, there were some tiny creeks of discussions, by Bob Cordell, Jan Didden, Andy__C, and others, but I did not see any input John contributed to this technical discussion.
I know PMA how this thread is called, but can you show me something about Blowtorch and it's criticism? It is good that you've learned John Curl's design preferences, we have 2 John Curls now, that is better than one. But who is criticizing that, at least last half of the year, in this particular thread? Why John is crying that the whole community is against his great ideas, why an ensemble of yourself and Joshua sing the same song regardless of what is going on in the thread, as if you are singing from some parallel reality absolutely irrelevant to the discussion?
What do you smoke, guys? I want to try the same.
Drivers in Siberia liked Tatra trucks. They had an air cooling system, also their suspension was very good to drive through a forest.
certainly ; you are using ГУ50
Now, wait till they accuse me in stealing it's design from Telefunken.
certainly ; you are using ГУ50
The ГУ-50 (GU50) is a copy of the German LS50 made by Telefunken.
Expressing in writing what I think about the last two pages in this thread would bring me some (well deserved) bin time.
So, instead, I would suggest closing this thread for good. It has absolutely no more reason to exist.
I would also open a "Solid state design principles" sticky thread which would hopefully allow some productive discussions, without endorsing or being endorsed by anybody in particular.
So, instead, I would suggest closing this thread for good. It has absolutely no more reason to exist.
I would also open a "Solid state design principles" sticky thread which would hopefully allow some productive discussions, without endorsing or being endorsed by anybody in particular.
Again, a request to close the most popular thread on this website, because it is not 'politically correct'. The real reason is to get rid of the open controversy related to newer ideas in how to make good audio circuit designs. Then the status quo designers would not be pricked by annoying critics of high feedback, the existence of PIM, etc.
Can everyone see this? This is not about circuitry or circuit ideas, but an attack on my person, background knowledge, and ideas.
If 'they' can provoke me, or anyone else to go over the top, then they can and do demand the thread be closed, rather than 'them' just going away and addressing another thread, and leaving 'us' alone.
You see, there is more to this, than just bad manners.
Can everyone see this? This is not about circuitry or circuit ideas, but an attack on my person, background knowledge, and ideas.
If 'they' can provoke me, or anyone else to go over the top, then they can and do demand the thread be closed, rather than 'them' just going away and addressing another thread, and leaving 'us' alone.
You see, there is more to this, than just bad manners.
Biggest problem is that it has little content. Just ignore the critics and post your new ideas. The members can take it or leave it. Discussions of automobiles don't strike me as Good Audio Design. And if it is a metaphor, it has been well overused at this point.
Just do as your mommy said- ignore them..
Just do as your mommy said- ignore them..
- Status
- Not open for further replies.