Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III
John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th November 2018, 07:36 AM   #9901
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
@ PMA,

i am still interested in your answers/more specific points, as written in:
John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

You surely wouldn´t post something like "you posted no facts" without having specific (and correct) complaints, would you?

@mmerrill99,

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmerrill99 View Post
In a certain sense, I empathize with PMA as what he (& many here) want is a definitive listening test which truly can be trusted to audibly differentiate between devices/files.
I understand the frustration in not having such a listening test & the defensiveness in trying to defend one's chosen test methodology as being somehow the answer.

When people point out the various flaws in such chosen methodology, it's natural to be defensive & to accuse the bringer of bad news with not having anything definitive to offer.

I think, in some way, this is what PMA is leveling at you, Jakob2 - not offering the final solution?
Could be, but usually i prefer to assume that people are interested in a honest discussion and up to now i had no reason to think differently about PMA.

The solutions about doing good experiments are simply not that easy, as there are a lot of variables/confounders to consider, but the underlying principles are the same; test have to be objective,reliable and valid.

So in fact it doesn´t matter what specific protocol/conditions someone is using,as the task is always the same, be able to show that it is objective, reliable and valid.

So far the existing evidence provides corrobation for the hypothesis (long favoured in the audio field) that the ABX protocol provides more difficulties for the participants. Does that mean nobody could use it? Of course not, as i´ve written before, people like Putzeys or Frindle reported quite impressive results from ABX tests with music.

But as an experimenter you have to ensure that the participants are really used to the specific conditions and you have to provide positive and negative controls as well.
These demands are basically the same regardless of the specific protocol used.
For good reasons it is accordingly mentioned in the ITU-Recommendations.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 07:52 AM   #9902
TNT is offline TNT  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719 View Post
The modern Porsche and Ferrari design processes are the exact opposite of "high-end" audio. They are data-driven and rely on extensive FEM simulation of every component. They have objective targets. Ferrari has multiple of their own state-of-the-art datacenters just for their F1 program.
Yes it is really a scientific process steered by real-life KPI like lap-times on the Ring etc. Due to these KPIs, all tweakers and boutique components are since long gone. Our "game" don't have the corresponding undeniable KPIs so wodo may still reign. From this, one realises that it is not the audio components that is in dear need to be progressed but the KPIs - would we want to advance the field.

//
__________________
More distortion to the people!
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:09 AM   #9903
john curl is offline john curl  United States
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
I really don't think than most here understand serious audio design at all. It isn't just computer simulations, although it might help. It isn't just putting something together and listening, although that might be part of it, and it cannot not be just a specific set of measurements, like THD that look good in print, either. It is a combination, of good initial concept (topology) coupled with proper parts selection, and finally tuning the combination with both listening tests and measurements. Usually something compromises the design effort. It might be cost, it might be heatsink limitations, it might be size, it might be bull-headedness of one of the principals as to what is important or not important. Usually there is no perfect execution of any design, like an amp, and that is what makes it a challenge to try to do one better.
__________________
"Condemnation without Examination is Prejudice"
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:12 AM   #9904
scottjoplin is offline scottjoplin  Wales
diyAudio Member
 
scottjoplin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Penrhyndeudraeth
Amps are boring, they all sound the same, well know fact!
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:16 AM   #9905
scottjoplin is offline scottjoplin  Wales
diyAudio Member
 
scottjoplin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Penrhyndeudraeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by simon7000 View Post
Accurate reproduction of the recorded sound or of the actual event?
That old meaningless chestnut
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:23 AM   #9906
billshurv is online now billshurv  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
billshurv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
important. Usually there is no perfect execution of any design, like an amp, and that is what makes it a challenge to try to do one better.

It's called Engineering. Making something that meets spec (including all the bits they forgot) for minimal ex-factory cost with optimal reliability. No one can ever keep iterating to get the perfect design or the company will go bust. (Cern etc just build the best they can then ask for more cubic dollars to build better).



High end audio just has a 'flooby' spec to meet.



Odd that no one has thrown their hands up in horror about an uber amp with not only tone controls, but also feedforward error correction. Should have the low feedback crowd in palpitations
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:25 AM   #9907
Zung is offline Zung  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Geneva
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
... It isn't just computer simulations, although it might help...
Sez the guy who taught me Microcap
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 10:52 AM   #9908
Max Headroom is offline Max Headroom  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Max Headroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: West Australia, near to the beach, natural ambient sounds mostly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
I really don't think than most here understand serious audio design at all. It isn't just computer simulations, although it might help. It isn't just putting something together and listening, although that might be part of it, and it cannot not be just a specific set of measurements, like THD that look good in print, either. It is a combination, of good initial concept (topology) coupled with proper parts selection, and finally tuning the combination with both listening tests and measurements. Usually something compromises the design effort. It might be cost, it might be heatsink limitations, it might be size, it might be bull-headedness of one of the principals as to what is important or not important. Usually there is no perfect execution of any design, like an amp, and that is what makes it a challenge to try to do one better.
Hi John.
What do you mean by 'tuning' in this context ?.

Dan.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 11:09 AM   #9909
TNT is offline TNT  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sweden
If you by "most" mean the forum members in general - probably so, but the readers in this thread - I think they do actually.

//

Quote:
Originally Posted by john curl View Post
I really don't think than most here understand serious audio design at all. It isn't just computer simulations, although it might help. It isn't just putting something together and listening, although that might be part of it, and it cannot not be just a specific set of measurements, like THD that look good in print, either. It is a combination, of good initial concept (topology) coupled with proper parts selection, and finally tuning the combination with both listening tests and measurements. Usually something compromises the design effort. It might be cost, it might be heatsink limitations, it might be size, it might be bull-headedness of one of the principals as to what is important or not important. Usually there is no perfect execution of any design, like an amp, and that is what makes it a challenge to try to do one better.
__________________
More distortion to the people!
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2018, 11:54 AM   #9910
hhoyt is offline hhoyt  United States
diyAudio Member
 
hhoyt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III
The factor also applying to hearing which cannot be factored out:
Why a Placebo is Real Medicine:

So let's talk about circuits.
Howie
__________________
Howard Hoyt, CE - WXYC-FM 89.3
UNC Chapel Hill, NC - www.wxyc.org
  Reply With Quote

Reply


John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part IIIHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:00 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 14.29%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio
Wiki