John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
Good information Gerhard thank you. I do like your comment
There is no need for this performance level in audio. The perceived need could
"at best" be justified by incompetent amplifier design. DIY and "Hi End" designers
seem to flock to circuits that have no power supply rejection, for simplicity, ignorance,
tunnel vision or fashion. For me that's wrong from the start, more a symptom than a feature.

The LT3042 is 40 dB better than the rest of the crowd like LM317. If that is
not sufficient, something else must be wrong.


Sums it up rather neatly :)
 
Member
Joined 2014
Paid Member
That was the original thought for me, but I can also power the miniDSP that way so, other than the bluray player which can be moved I will only need mains leads for the power amps.



It's not universal, but if the other option is to go medieval on the mains with half a ton of iron I'll go batteries because I can.
 
Current discussion is about quality of DC supplies and has also recently been about AC supply filtering....both are are intertwined subjects IME.
I have run USB isolator/5V power injection pcb using a Lead/Acid car battery as supply that should have essentially zero impedance and essentially zero noise according to accepted criterion (on board down regulated to +5V), HOWEVER I found that RLC filtering of this Lead/Acid DC supply made sonic difference compared to using other battery chemistries of not the same but more than ample current capability for the application with the same RLC filtering.......I am saying that somehow different batteries sound different despite the same filtering and DC regulation on the same USB isolator/DC injector pcb.


Dan.
 
Current discussion is about quality of DC supplies and has also recently been about AC supply filtering....both are are intertwined subjects IME.
I have run USB isolator/5V power injection pcb using a Lead/Acid car battery as supply that should have essentially zero impedance and essentially zero noise according to accepted criterion (on board down regulated to +5V), HOWEVER I found that RLC filtering of this Lead/Acid DC supply made sonic difference compared to using other battery chemistries of not the same but more than ample current capability for the application with the same RLC filtering.......I am saying that somehow different batteries sound different despite the same filtering and DC regulation on the same USB isolator/DC injector pcb.

Of course. Lead batteries are using lead electrons (heavy) while lithium batteries use lithium electrons (much lighter). Lithium electrons can easily sneak through RLC filters and regulators, while the lead electrons are too heavy to get through, hence the lead batteries appear as having much less excess noise modulated properties.
 
Of course. Lead batteries are using lead electrons (heavy) while lithium batteries use lithium electrons (much lighter). Lithium electrons can easily sneak through RLC filters and regulators, while the lead electrons are too heavy to get through, hence the lead batteries appear as having much less excess noise modulated properties.

This all sounds a bit glass hammer and a bucket of steam - you having a larf? :rofl:
 
This all sounds a bit glass hammer and a bucket of steam - you having a larf? :rofl:

No, I have a random audiophile phrase generator that I enjoy powering up from time to time and post bits and pieces of wisdom from the output stream. Unfortunately it cannot compete with Dan, Bybee, Geoff Kait, and Stereophile reviewers generators, but I'm working at version 2.0
 
Last edited:
BTW above measurements are valid only for Li-Ion without built-in electronic fuse
and say nothing about Li-IronPhosphate or other chemistries.


These cells are dangerous without fuses. They can easily melt wires, as it happened
to me on a follow-up measurement. 20A is easy for them.

I wondered about a rise in noise above 600 KHz, suspected the input cap and removed it,
but it was not the cap. It was the single U-shaped layout connection from the coupling cap
to the 20 op amp inputs. Skin effect.

Changing that to the mesh whose remains can be seen in the photo changed that.

Unfortunately I forgot about the missing capacitor until the next weekend.
Oh, that smell!
:eek: And the amplifier was in a nearly watertight Hammond metal box with 6 screws.

Be careful with these batteries.
 

Attachments

  • Bildschirmfoto vom 2019-10-16 23-36-55.png
    Bildschirmfoto vom 2019-10-16 23-36-55.png
    449.6 KB · Views: 356
Last edited:
Batteries are usually a good solution, but hard to keep charged. AND the best audio products require too much current and voltage to be easily battery powered. However, making a good AC powered supply is a real challenge. Not because of regulation, or even noise necessarily, but subtle problems from leakage, feedback overshoot, etc.
 
A Method for Voltage Noise Measurement and Its Application to Primary Batteries
Though proven effective in localized corrosion studies, electrochemical noise measurements in batteries with Lithium based chemistries suffer from lack of well–defined measurement and analysis methods. The high capacitance electrodes made out of highly porous materials requires noise measurements to be extremely precise since the small charge due to stochastic events leading to electrochemical noise leads to very small voltage changes due to the large capacitance. Typically, the required precision is achieved by high gain after the offset is corrected. In this article, we are introducing a new offset correction scheme that mitigates the negative effects of electronic offset reduction methods. Using this new offset correction scheme we report the measurement of the otherwise elusive voltage noise of primary Li batteries.
 
Yes, I'm glad I've picked a career trajectory that relies much more on objective end results, where intuition helps solve poorly understood problems but ultimately has to meet a hard end point.

To rely on my perception and the compromised feedback of others (there's so much more going on to a listening test, especially sighted than just the sound), no thanks. We as humans are shown to be too unreliable for that kind of work.

As we have discussed about it quite often in the past, let´s just keep in mind that the socalled replication crisis exists quite a long time and that Cohen mentioned that problem of underpowered studies the first time in the 1960s while already emphasizing that he only reinvented an old idea.

So despite the need for hard end points it seems that the "hard results" are often just an illusion.

The notion that the knowledge about a device creates an overwhelming, uncontrollable bias-effect in a listening test while all other bias-effects, that are still at work under controlled (and "blind") conditions, are controllable isn't that well corrobated by experimental results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.