View Full Version : Goldpoint SA4M-47 passive 'preamp' winging its way to Marco Towers...
brian2957
05-10-2015, 22:36
Ive got foot doc at lunchtime, and shopping sometime but if your aroungd after 1 I can be in mate
Have to be earlier mate , around 10am if that's OK .
Jeez, you'll catch him stlll in his Superman pyjamas! :D
Marco.
brian2957
05-10-2015, 22:38
Yes , if I'm lucky :lol:
Marco and delivery man after his LDR is delivered :lol:
http://brokelyn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Screen-shot-2012-08-14-at-9.44.07-AM.png
:lolsign:
And remember folks, the boogey man is out to get you, too! :eek: :lol:
Sleep tight at night, say 'NO' to cadmium.
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/911/ZNObPI.jpg
Marco.
Have to be earlier mate , around 10am if that's OK .
well, yes I will be here then, .ok I will get my nails painted scarlet:D
brian2957
05-10-2015, 22:42
Mind an do the toenails too :lol: See ye ramorra then :D
Mind an do the toenails too :lol: See ye ramorra then :D
okay Brian. I'll make you a coffee if your good;)
Mind an do the toenails too :lol:
You won't see them thru his black tights! :D
Marco.
Well, just got back from the 'resistor bake-off' at Duncan's, which took part this afternoon - and very interesting it was too, with pretty much a clear winner! :)
Report later, once I've sorted out the pics and had my dinner :cool:
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
06-10-2015, 19:10
Was it one of these?
http://i.ebayimg.com/07/!BjyM0Ww!2k~$(KGrHqEH-DUEs6eKRz9qBLU3gZguBw~~_35.JPG
Ok, as I said a very interesting session at Duncs... First we listened to the bog-standard metal-film series resistors, which cost pennies from Farnell, and that I had been listening to over the last few days [the little blue things beside the wires on the R/H side, for those that don't know]:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/633/bvofbP.jpg
I had been quite enjoying these, especially since they had burned in, and Duncan agreed that they sounded pretty good, detailed and expressive with (seemingly) no overt sonic signature. However, we were keen to hear what the first proper 'audiophile' resistors would bring to the party, so first in went the Caddock MK132V Precision Thick Film resistors, at a value of 20K:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/909/FKkEY9.jpg
WOW - what a difference! :eek:
Dunc and I immediately loved these, commenting that they created a 'blacker' background, compared with the super-cheap Farnell resistors, allowing more harmonic detail in the music to be heard, together with a tuneful, beautifully layered and textured bass, which succeeded to underpin music with a muscular authority. It was considered subjectively easier to 'follow the tune', with the Caddocks in place, and pace, rhythm and timing were in the first rank. These also seemed to do the trick of '3D imaging' rather well.
I remarked that it reminded me in some ways of what Naim equipment does well, but without its tonally rather 'grey and grainy' sonic signature and tendency to 'bleach out' music's natural warmth and colour. Music was subjectively 'fast' and fun to listen to with these resistors in place, which was a good result, with them being one of the cheaper types on test, at £3.07 each. A cultured sound that would also appeal to 'flat earthers'!
Pros: 'Fast and punchy' presentation, but also not without finesse.
Cons: Compared with the best here, lacking in midrange lucidity. Good 'bang for buck'.
Verdict: 7/10.
Next up was PRP PR9372 metal-films, at a value of 22K (as unfortunately 20K was unavailable), costing only 54p each. I got these because this is what Duncan had fitted in his own passive preamp, so I wanted to try them in the Goldpoint:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/903/CpvShm.jpg
These were considered to have a very detailed, clear and expansive sound, but also one that was 'harder', somewhat 'matter of fact' and not as '3D', as the Caddocks. We felt that the overall presentation was balanced more towards the high-frequencies, creating a 'crisp' sound, but ultimately one that was low on musical involvement. They had the effect, as we put them through their paces, of us gradually becoming disinterested in the music.
Ultimately, these were a little bland in comparison with the others we tried. Not a great success then, and as such it has now prompted Duncan to upgrade the resistors in his own passive preamp, with the winners of the test. Read on for details.
Pros: Detailed and clear sound. Inexpensive.
Cons: Not the last word in subtlety or finesse.
Verdict: 5/10.
Next up was the Amrans AMRG Carbon-Films, at a value of 22K (again as 20K was unavailable), costing a not inconsiderable £4.40 each:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/910/pAkvSZ.jpg
We were both looking forward to hearing these, being the only carbon-films in the test. After listening to the somewhat poor PRPs, these initially sounded quite impressive, with much better bass, reminiscent of that of the Caddocks, but not as 'fast', rhythmic or tuneful. The sound was also better balanced overall, than with the PRPs, but came with an added warmth and slight 'bloom' in the mid and low frequencies that wasn't welcomed and considered as unnatural.
The Amrans were a fairly musical listen, but definitely had a 'darker', 'creamier', and ultimately more restrained sonic presentation than that of any of the metal-film resistors we had listened to before, so much so that we felt that they were acting a little as tone controls, which was not an effect we wanted. I remarked that the sound was reminiscent of Alps Black potentiometers (also carbon based) - certainly those I used to have fitted to my Croft. The Amrans were good, but not what we were looking for in this application.
Pros: A musical listen with good bass and a warm, yet detailed presentation, which may help ameliorate sterility in clinical sounding systems.
Cons: For our tastes, they acted too much like tone controls.
Verdict: 6/10.
Now things started to get really interesting with the introduction of the 'big guns', the first of which was the AudioNote Tantalum Non-Magnetics, again at a value of 22k, costing £12.50 each. These are also 2W, so rather bigger than the other resistors we had been using up until then:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/909/Rx2kdU.jpg
As soon as these went in, Duncan and I looked at each other and said 'WTF!' :eek: These were clearly a considerable step-up in quality from the other resistors we had tried up until this point, producing a huge, bold and vigorous sound, full of drive and energy, and palpable weight and authority, but also one that conveyed significant levels of subtlety and finesse.
Subjectively, they appeared to make the music louder, but that was likely because the noise-floor was lower, allowing the midrange more freedom of expression and natural projection. The midrange presentation of the AudioNotes is really rather special, making female voices in particular seemingly 'float in mid air' and hang somewhat spookily between the speakers.
Their ability to excel at micro-detail and harmonic texture was also extremely beguiling and addictive, rather like the sonic and musical qualities that the best valve amplifiers bring to the party over their solid-state counterparts. In that sense, the ANs acted as the '300Bs' of the resistor world... The level of musical insight offered by the AudioNote Tantalums was quite something to behold, and we just wanted to keep on listening to more and more music - always a good sign. However, we had to get on with completing the test!
Pros: Amazing midrange lucidity, weight and micro-detail.
Cons: Low-end 'heft' and tonal richness could prove too much in some systems.
Verdict: 9/10.
Last up was the Charcroft Z-Foils, at a value of 20K, costing £9.17 each:
http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1024x768q90/903/dSEg3g.jpg
These were very well received indeed, possessing beautiful filigree detailing at the top end, with subjectively a little more 'air' and extension than that offered by the AudioNotes, such that leading edges were crisper and had marginally more 'attack'. However, the sound lacked the weight, power and authority of the AudioNotes (although by normal standards certainly was not lacking), or their extremely lucid, communicative, 'out of the box' midrange.
The Z-Foils have a slightly more 'delicate' and precise sonic presentation, and perhaps one that is also a little leaner. In the red wine world, one could say it would be like comparing a good Chianti Classico Riserva (the Z-foils), with a rich and full-bodied Amarone (the AudioNotes). The former providing the greater 'acidity' with which to savour a perfectly cooked char-grilled T-bone steak, and the latter, the structure and depth to accompany a fine roast grouse.
Therefore, simply choose one's 'dish' accordingly, and apply it to musical choices liable to lend themselves best to the respective 'flavour' of either of these highly capable components. In the final analysis, to my ears (and those of Duncan) the AudioNotes edged it overall in the musicality stakes: that magic effect which makes you just want to listen forever and rediscover your music collection.
Pros: Superb high-frequency extension and ability to delineate the musical message.
Cons: Leaner in presentation and a little more 'matter of fact' sounding than the AN Tantalums.
Verdict 8/10.
So there you have it, folks.
However, what I intend to do is live with the AudioNote Tantalums for a week, a) to allow them to burn-in fully, and b) to acclimatise myself to their sound, by chucking all sorts of different music at them. At that point, once I've had them for a week, I'll then swap to the Z-Foils, which of course I must hear in my own system before coming to a proper conclusion, in terms of which resistors are considered best in the context of my system, and thus will take up permanent residence inside the Goldpoint.
Hope you enjoyed reading the resistor comparisons and that they may be of some use in your own equipment experiments! :cool:
Marco.
anubisgrau
06-10-2015, 22:44
what's actual role of these resistors? to fix the output impedance or something else?
Looks like you had fun. Glad your happy with it now.:)
walpurgis
06-10-2015, 23:06
Weird that just a choice of resistor can have such varying effects Marco.
Hi Gordan,
what's actual role of these resistors? to fix the output impedance or something else?
Duncan explained it earlier, in terms of how the Goldpoint passive preamp has now been rewired:
The Goldpoint is a series attenuator not a shunt type, originally.
I've connected the in and outputs to ground and connected the original ground to the output side of the z series resistor.
Creating a shunt type attenuator.
The resistors that were compared in the above test were the series resistors that the signal is now going through, with the original surface-mount ones (used in the stepped attenuators themselves) now acting as shunts, going to ground.
Therefore, what I'm listening to now effectively is the sound of the AudioNote Tantalums - and the sonic improvement is significant! :)
Marco.
Looks like you had fun. Glad your happy with it now.:)
Yes, but the Z-Foils might make it there in yet! ;)
Marco.
Weird that just a choice of resistor can have such varying effects Marco.
You better believe it, Geoff. Everything I've reported was genuinely heard by both of us. I didn't realise that different resistors could have such a pronounced effect either, but clearly they do! :)
Marco.
Annoying result as in good resistors cost too much.
This sort of thing makes you realise just how complex getting a decent sound is. This is magnified far more in complex circuits, where the number of component interactions increases by a big factor.
walpurgis
06-10-2015, 23:22
You better believe it, Geoff. Everything I've reported was genuinely heard by both of us. I didn't realise that different resistors could have such a pronounced effect either, but clearly they do! :)
Marco.
Wish I'd been there to hear all that. It may (and may still) have influenced my selection of resistors for a couple of projects.
It makes one realise why some makes appear costly for seemingly the simple designs they manufacture. Audio Note spring to mind. I'm sure they spend a lot of time and money actually listening to the effects of every discrete part of what they make.
BTW used to use the Caddocks in the first iteration of the crossovers in my first pair of Apogee Duettas. They had quite and thumpy, weighty bass, as I remember them.
We're now using some flat pack secret things I can't tell you about, without getting shot, LOL.
Ali Tait
06-10-2015, 23:31
Thought you'd like those AN's Marco, they were the best of what I tried.
Hi Justin,
Annoying result as in good resistors cost too much.
This sort of thing makes you realise just how complex getting a decent sound is. This is magnified far more in complex circuits, where the number of component interactions increases by a big factor.
Yup, it was somewhat gratifying that the more expensive resistors in the test sounded markedly better than the others, which shows that sometimes you do get what you're paying for! :)
Essentially, a very good passive preamp, in its stock form, has now been considerably improved by spending £12.50 each on two resistors. It'd call that a result... Like you say though, how much would it cost to kit out a whole active preamp or power amp with them! :eek:
Marco.
Wish I'd been there to hear all that. It may (and may still) have influenced my selection of resistors for a couple of projects.
It makes one realise why some makes appear costly for seemingly the simple designs they manufacture. Audio Note spring to mind. I'm sure they spend a lot of time and money actually listening to the effects of every discrete part of what they make.
Indeed. It was another valuable learning curve in this sometimes complex hobby of audio! :)
Marco.
Thought you'd like those AN's Marco, they were the best of what I tried.
Yup, Ali, they're *really* good. However, I need to revisit the Z-foils, as I haven't yet heard those in my system. Listening to the ANs here, and remembering how the Z-Foils sounded in Duncan's system, I wouldn't rule out the latter making it in here instead, particularly as they're 20K (as opposed to 22K), and so just that bit more suited to my system.
We shall see after a week is up and the swap over takes place! :cool:
Marco.
Great write up and fascinating results Marco :)
Would be interesting to hear how a 'blank' Goldpoint attenuator kitted out with the 'best of the test' would fair as opposed to the stock ladder ... an expensive jaunt but who knows ;)
Hi Mike,
The AudioNotes wouldn't fit into the switches (flick back to the pics and note their size), as they're only available in 2W versions... And the Shinkohs (nearest equivalent) aren't available in the values I would need.
Glad you liked the write-up. I intend to enjoy the music now for the rest of the week, allowing the ANs to burn in, until giving the Z-Foils a go in my system :cool:
Marco.
brian2957
07-10-2015, 07:51
Now that's what I call a write-up :) . It was kept reasonably simple for an electronics dummy like me . I usually switch off after reading a couple of lines of this type of test , but I read all of this with interest . Yes it's interesting how a couple of tiny , relatively inexpensive , parts can elevate the performance of a piece of kit . I also heard this a while back when Gary changed 1 single cap in his M2Tech DAC . The part cost pennies and the improvement in SQ was clearly audible . Funny old game innit :) Well done sir .
The Black Adder
07-10-2015, 08:00
A very nice review indeed, Marco... well done matey-ho.
Sounds like the AN are doin' the boogie :) - Not surprising though.
The Caddocks you used are somewhat different in design to the ones I tried on my shunt attenuator, must be newer versions.
Cheers for that, all very interesting indeed.
Jo
Cheers, guys. Glad you enjoyed the write-up and found it informative. As a summary, I've now added some 'pros and cons' under the description of each of the resistors, which some of you may find useful :)
Marco.
Oh, and just to correct the uninitiated elsewhere, who've made stupid comments like this:
All he has done is load the input to the stepped attenuators, the stepped attenuators are still the same SMD crap that was there before.
Pay proper attention! The original series attenuators (the SMDs) now act as variable shunt resistors. The series attenuators in use now are the AudioNote Tantalums. That was the whole point of rewiring the switches, and why the performance of the unit, as a result (as it now uses only one very high-quality series resistor in the signal path), has been considerably upgraded :ner:
Marco.
walpurgis
07-10-2015, 09:10
I wonder if Goldpoint are looking at this thread? I'm sure they must have evaluated many resistor types during the design of the item.
I believe they did, hence why they made the comment about selecting the Nichrome SMD variety, because they considered them as the best sounding, but I doubt they'd have tried the ANs or Z-Foils, as they'd add too much to the cost of a commercial product.
That's where the benefits of judicious modifications come in: taking an already excellent product and elevating its performance to an even higher level, beyond the budget cost-effectiveness of a commercial manufacturer. Almost every piece of kit in my system has been subjected to such, with great success! :)
Marco.
Just as a further little experiment, because I wanted to try the excellent Shinkoh Tantalums (but didn't do so originally because they weren't available in 20K): http://www.hificollective.co.uk/components/shinkoh_resistors.html
...I've ordered 2 x 18K 1W versions, just to see what they're like. Hopefully, being 18K, they won't be too 'loud' on the lower steps of the volume controls. If I like them better than the AN Tants, I'll use them, but if they're not quite as good, and I prefer the 18Ks, then I'll order the AN Tants in that value.
All interesting stuff! :)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 10:02
I went through a similar process for the I/V conversion resistors in my Chameleon DAC. I used Shinkoh tants, as the ANs were magnetic at the time. Carbon= warmer and softer, metal film=sharper but harder, Shinkoh="bigger", Z-foils=disappeared. All relative of course. I used the Texas Components Z-foils; they make Vishay's Z-foils, but I don't know if they are all the same or not. I buy them direct.
One thing to bear in mind is lead length - the Z-foils had the longest leads which may (or not) make some difference. One reason for using SMD resistors, short path.
I may retry the Shinkohs at some point, as my sytem has changed since.
Now, for a proper test, you need to find a volume level you are happy with, and use single resistors of each type in the shunt leg!
More self-serving nonsense from 'elsewhere', spouted because that's what he wants his fanboys to believe:
No SMD (surface mount device) fitted attenuator can ever be as good as one fitted with proper good standard (through hole) resistor, it is not possible. SMD was created for production purposes not quality, for circuits that are not critical to component quality. In fact they are often seen off by a good pot in this application.
That might be your experience, but it most certainly isn't mine or that of countless others. Both DACT and Goldpoint have been using SMDs in the design of their stepped attenuators for years, and their products are amongst the most respected on the market, used in many professional applications. You don't get that sort of reputation if your products are crap!
Furthermore, the DACT and Goldpoint stepped attenuators have totally outperformed any pots I've heard within the applications I've tested them in. They're certainly the quietest and smoothest in operation, which is testament to how well made they are. The quality of the switches themselves is outstanding. That was one of the main reasons why I chose them.
That's not to say, however, that some pots might work well or better in a different application, such as in your own passive preamp. After all, it's all about achieving synergy, and not only YOUR version of that is best ;)
The only reasons why the Goldpoint sounds better now than it did originally is because it has now been converted from a series to a variable shunt-type device, using superior quality series resistors than were originally fitted, thus improving SQ for that reason, and notably because there is now only one series resistor in the signal path, instead of (at some positions) 47! However, I still retain the flexibility of volume adjustment, with the 47 steps: a win-win in anyone's book.
The original Nichrome SMDs, now acting as shunts, have little influence on the sound of the unit (or certainly nowhere near as much), so get that into your thick head. I shall now return to enjoying the superb sounding music from my system and respond no further to your blinkered and ignorant pish :wave:
Marco.
I went through a similar process for the I/V conversion resistors in my Chameleon DAC. I used Shinkoh tants, as the ANs were magnetic at the time. Carbon= warmer and softer, metal film=sharper but harder, Shinkoh="bigger", Z-foils=disappeared. All relative of course. I used the Texas Components Z-foils; they make Vishay's Z-foils, but I don't know if they are all the same or not. I buy them direct.
One thing to bear in mind is lead length - the Z-foils had the longest leads which may (or not) make some difference. One reason for using SMD resistors, short path.
I may retry the Shinkohs at some point, as my sytem has changed since.
Now, for a proper test, you need to find a volume level you are happy with, and use single resistors of each type in the shunt leg!
All good and valid points, Richard. Don't worry, we're already considering that! ;)
However, I'm not totally convinced that the shunts are as sonically influential. Is your experience contrary to that? Yup, in reality, the Goldpoint is still 'work in progress' - but considerable progress is being made :)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 10:16
Wish I'd been there to hear all that. It may (and may still) have influenced my selection of resistors for a couple of projects.
It makes one realise why some makes appear costly for seemingly the simple designs they manufacture. Audio Note spring to mind. I'm sure they spend a lot of time and money actually listening to the effects of every discrete part of what they make.
http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/art_audio_hell.shtml Which I believe is a better way.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 10:17
All good and valid points, Richard. Don't worry, we're already considering that! ;)
However, I'm not totally convinced the shunts are as sonically influential. Is your experience contrary to that?
Marco.
Not in this context, as I haven't experimented. But in speaker crossovers, yes.
Ok, noted. No doubt it's one that'll probably get the better of us... We'll try it in Duncan's own passive unit first, to see if it makes any difference, as it'll be easier to implement there, and if successful, modify the Goldpoint accordingly.
You certainly can't have all this fun (and useful learning) by boringly sticking with a stock product!! ;)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 10:24
Both DACT and Goldpoint have been using SMDs in the design of their stepped attenuators for years, and their products are amongst the most respected on the market, used in many professional applications. You don't get that sort of reputation if your products are crap!:
Marco.
You must bear in mind that some of these products are only possible in their current form because SMD devices allow dense packing and very short signal paths. Don't confuse the component with the circuit! I already mentioned that the Z-foils have long legs in your test; you need to be able to separate the different effects if you are going to put down someone else!
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 10:28
Ok, noted. No doubt it's one that'll probably get the better of us... We'll try it in Duncan's own passive unit first, to see if it makes any difference, as it'll be easier to implement there, and if successful, do it to the Goldpoint.
You certainly can't have all this fun (and useful learning) by boringly sticking with a stock product!! ;)
Marco.
Agreed. And it may be worth mounting some good sockets in a box and doing this experiment without any Goldpoint parts. A quick comparison would then be possible.
Sorry you are still the idiot who doesn't understand. All you have done is change the wiring. It is still the same crap SMD attenuator using a different resistor to load it, exactly as I said.
No!
Listen up and listen well: the original "crap SMD resistors" are now being used as SHUNTS. They are no longer in series. In the SERIES position now are AudioNote Tantalums, the effect of which is what is mainly being heard, hence the significant sonic upgrade.
If what you are saying was correct, there would never have been such a dramatic upgrade heard!
Furthermore, the Glasshouse devices, you're wanking yourself over, I've already had fitted to the Croft (and they were good), but were subsequently outperformed by a DACT (yes, using similar SMDs to the Goldpoint) - and the Goldpoint switches are better than the DACT, so go figure!!
Now this is the last I will respond to your nonsense. In any case, the proof of the pudding will be when the Goldpoint (when it's finished) is compared with Macca's NVA. If the latter wins, then that's what will be fairly reported. However, given the blinkered shite you've been writing about the Goldpoint, if it wins, you can be assured that you won't ever hear the end of it..... :upyours: :finger:
Marco.
You must bear in mind that some of these products are only possible in their current form because SMD devices allow dense packing and very short signal paths. Don't confuse the component with the circuit!
Precisely, which is what the uninitiated idiot from 'elsewhere' is deliberately ignoring, or doesn't have the brains to appreciate. And it's highly significant.
And it may be worth mounting some good sockets in a box and doing this experiment without any Goldpoint parts. A quick comparison would then be possible.
Yup, good idea :thumbsup:
Marco.
Problems
Solder joint dimensions in SMD quickly become much smaller as advances are made toward ultra-fine pitch technology. The reliability of solder joints becomes more of a concern, as less and less solder is allowed for each joint. Voiding is a fault commonly associated with solder joints, especially when reflowing a solder paste in the SMD application. The presence of voids can deteriorate the joint strength and eventually lead to joint failure.
SMD is unsuitable for large, high-power, or high-voltage parts, for example in power circuitry. It is common to combine SMD and through-hole construction, with transformers, heat-sinked power semiconductors, physically large capacitors, fuses, connectors, and so on mounted on one side of the PCB through holes.
SMD is unsuitable as the sole attachment method for components that are subject to frequent mechanical stress, such as connectors that are used to interface with external devices that are frequently attached and detached.
SMD are small low wattage components so cannot duplicate proper through hole component. There were developed for computers, not for audio products.
They have very small and weak solder joints compared with through hole and are not recommended where there is physical shock or vibration, which is what a switch does when you turn it. This has given the DACT switch a reputation for losing positions from broken joints. They are not reliable.
Not my experience at all. Mine, over many years of using them, is the complete opposite.
Regardless, and this is the bit you need to allow to penetrate through that rhino-thick, pigheaded skull of yours: none of the above stopped a DACT stepped attenuator from outperforming, in my system, your favoured Glasshouse (replete with your favoured resistors)!!
So as ever, it proves that there is no 'universally best' anything in audio, no matter how much it suits you to think otherwise! If the shunts make as much difference to the sound as the series resistors, then I will also upgrade those in due course. However, it makes sense to do one thing at a time, both form a learning and cost P.O.V.
Regardless, if I end up removing the SMD shunts and fitting whichever type of resistors there *I*, not the manufacturer of the stepped attenuator, think sounds best (as after all it's for my system), then I'll still have them fitted to what IMO are the best quality switches on the market: Goldpoint.
Now, embrace and accept that point, instead of like a pigheaded imbecile, arguing ad infinitum - and losing hilariously in the process. Mind you, it must be difficult quitting the habit of a lifetime!!
Can't wait for the NVA vs. Goldpoint passive bake-off.......... :eyebrows:
Marco.
Highly significant my arse. So you have done comparison. Laughable, just look at the mans pictures of the mods and how long the components legs have been left. If his point is true then the one with the shortest legs should win.
They were deliberately left that way, during the testing/listening process, you idiot, just in case I wanted to sell the ones I didn't like as much!! :doh:
The resistors I've kept, and am currently using (AN Tants) have been cut and properly fitted. Look at the picture of those, compared with the rest, or are you going blind as well as senile in your old age? Now give it up before you make yourself look an even bigger fool than you already are! :D
Over and out - time for lunch.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 11:50
Marco, are you posting replies to something said on a different forum?
orbscure
07-10-2015, 11:54
Richard... as we mere mortals are not allowed to mention the source on forum, I'll PM you with a link..
Beobloke
07-10-2015, 12:18
Marco, are you posting replies to something said on a different forum?
I was wondering that myself as there only appears to be half an argument going on... :scratch:
A certain Mr R Dunn and his cesspit. Need I say more? ;)
Marco.
PaulStewart
07-10-2015, 13:09
A certain Mr R Dunn and his cesspit. Need I say more? ;)
Marco.
Bit of advice you gave me mate, use the ignore button.......
I need a qualified engineer to confirm what's going on here please as I'm shocked that just ONE series resistor in each channel can make such a sonic difference (I think I really am going deaf now, as resistor tolerance would count more to me than type or maker in this case)...
A 'shunt' passive attenuator has ONE fixed value resistor in the signal path and each volume 'step' has a different resistor each step to 'load' or 'shunt' the signal further to adjust volume. This means the input and output impedance varies with each volume 'step,' doesn't it?
Again, confirmation needed please by an experienced engineer! More conventional attenuators have either a step ladder, the volume 'tapping' being taken from different 'rungs' on the ladder, giving a roughly equal impedance (in series AND across the load) to input and output at each 'step,' and lastly, an individual 'pair' of resistors at each 'step,' one in series and one across the load, maintaining constant impedance with each defined 'step.'
It just strikes me that a 'shunt' type is only half done, but if the varying load with each volume 'step' to both source and amp doesn't matter, then it's not a problem at all I expect.
HELP PLEASE!!!
I need a qualified engineer to confirm what's going on here please as I'm shocked that just ONE series resistor in each channel can make such a sonic difference (I think I really am going deaf now, as resistor tolerance would count more to me than type or maker in this case)...
Not sure what qualification you need, but I certainly have experience of this. Not entirly sure if you are asking a question with the above sentence or just saying what you expect to happen. Yes, you can clearly hear the differences in the shunted resistor in this sort of setup. All this was tried ten years ago on the WAD forum with just the same results. Its worth pointing out that you can (and I often do) use a shunt with a conventional pot to remove much of the sound of the pot. I do have to point out that I sugested that this was the best solution some pages ago and was told it "just didnt feel right" or some such. But hey ho.
A 'shunt' passive attenuator has ONE fixed value resistor in the signal path and each volume 'step' has a different resistor each step to 'load' or 'shunt' the signal further to adjust volume. This means the input and output impedance varies with each volume 'step,' doesn't it?
Yes.
It just strikes me that a 'shunt' type is only half done, but if the varying load with each volume 'step' to both source and amp doesn't matter, then it's not a problem at all I expect.
Again, yes, as I said some time ago, if you need fixed resistances in the input and output, then the shunt is not the best choice. Likewise if you need max output to be 0dB then a shunt is no use, if neither of these, then it can and does work well.
You may have thought that places like HiFi collective sell their wide range of components just to pander to fools, no, these things do matter, the reason manufactures don’t normally use them is simple, cost and the effect on their profit margin. If you looked inside Gary's 300b amp, you would find that the resistors in the signal path are all better types than the nasty metal film that sell for 1p a resistor, likewise the caps and so on. I use metal film in places like the power supply where the cost of something better is more than the benefit they bring. I dont do that just so I can charge more for the amp, I do it because it sounds better.
brian2957
07-10-2015, 13:59
+1 on Gary's new amp . I've heard it a couple of times now and it's stunning . Gary tells me that it sounds even better since the last time I heard it :eek:
+1 on Gary's new amp . I've heard it a couple of times now and it's stunning . Gary tells me that it sounds even better since the last time I heard it :eek:
Yes, ironically given this thread, but we have just found out that the noise floor of his preamp is now a limiting factor.
brian2957
07-10-2015, 14:12
Well it still sounded stunning to me Nick and I'm pretty sure Gary is grinning like a Cheshire cat as I write this :D If ever I get the cash together you'll be getting a call from me :)
Sincere thanks for your considered replies :respect:
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 14:24
Bit of advice you gave me mate, use the ignore button.......
Yes, please do, it's not helping this thread.
Ali Tait
07-10-2015, 14:29
Yes, ironically given this thread, but we have just found out that the noise floor of his preamp is now a limiting factor.
Is it the pre causing the hiss Nick?
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 14:34
I need a qualified engineer to confirm what's going on here please as I'm shocked that just ONE series resistor in each channel can make such a sonic difference (I think I really am going deaf now, as resistor tolerance would count more to me than type or maker in this case)...
A 'shunt' passive attenuator has ONE fixed value resistor in the signal path and each volume 'step' has a different resistor each step to 'load' or 'shunt' the signal further to adjust volume. This means the input and output impedance varies with each volume 'step,' doesn't it?
An engineer can certainly explain the circuit, but won't necessarily understand the sonic implications. In fact, an engineering background may well bias against hearing any difference. Not in all cases, obviously, or there would be very few advances in sonics.
Not sure what qualification you need, but I certainly have experience of this. Not entirly sure if you are asking a question with the above sentence or just saying what you expect to happen. Yes, you can clearly hear the differences in the shunted resistor in this sort of setup. All this was tried ten years ago on the WAD forum with just the same results. Its worth pointing out that you can (and I often do) use a shunt with a conventional pot to remove much of the sound of the pot. I do have to point out that I sugested that this was the best solution some pages ago and was told it "just didnt feel right" or some such. But hey ho.
I don't know if this is germaine, but using a log law faking resistor on a linear pot not long ago completely squashed the sonics. I have no idea why, as the overall resistances were maintained correctly. Buying a log pot of the same type restored the quality.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 14:41
+1 on Gary's new amp . I've heard it a couple of times now and it's stunning . Gary tells me that it sounds even better since the last time I heard it :eek:
Yes, ironically given this thread, but we have just found out that the noise floor of his preamp is now a limiting factor.
How much gain does it have? I recently sold a Consonance Cyber 222 Mk2 pre for this very reason. It had 28dB of gain! My passives work well into my power amps, so that was somewhat excessive. Part of my liking for passives is the low noise floor, especially as I listen late at night at very low levels. And resistive passives have lacked drive in my system.
Is it the pre causing the hiss Nick?
Yes, he unplugged the pre and it all goes quiet, which is how it was when it left me, you know how arsy I get about amps that make noises on their own.
Yup, what Nick said.
Unplugged the pre and it was gone.
Nick's stuff is bulletproof.
Hiss not terrible, and you certainly dont hear it when musics playing even at low volumes.
Now VERY interested in a good quality passive pre and what it can do for overall system sound.
Marco,
hope you can bring your over to mine when up this way. :)
Yup, what Nick said.
Unplugged the pre and it was gone.
Nick's stuff is bulletproof.
Hiss not terrible, and you certainly dont hear it when musics playing even at low volumes.
Now VERY interested in a good quality passive pre and what it can do for overall system sound.
Marco,
hope you can bring your over to mine when up this way. :)
You could try my tvc once ive got the Sony up and running
Ali Tait
07-10-2015, 15:11
Yes, he unplugged the pre and it all goes quiet, which is how it was when it left me, you know how arsy I get about amps that make noises on their own.
Well there's a thing - a valve power amp that's quieter than a SS pre..
Gary, will bring the Slagle passive over. Free on Friday if you are?
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 15:13
Yup, what Nick said.
Unplugged the pre and it was gone.
Nick's stuff is bulletproof.
Hiss not terrible, and you certainly dont hear it when musics playing even at low volumes.
Now VERY interested in a good quality passive pre and what it can do for overall system sound.
Marco,
hope you can bring your over to mine when up this way. :)
The thing with the noise floor is that often you don't hear it until it drops away. A bit like the wife. (She is sat next to me so I have to type quietly.)
Still trying to visualize the difference between shunt and series pots. Got this drawing from the web.. is this what it is ?
15473
Still trying to visualize the difference between shunt and series pots. Got this drawing from the web.. is this what it is ?
15473
That's how I understand it to be - this page from the Goldpoint site is also useful:
http://www.goldpt.com/attenuator_types.html
Still trying to visualize the difference between shunt and series pots. Got this drawing from the web.. is this what it is ?
15473
Yes that's it - that picture looks like the one that was used on the WAD forum. Several people used that mod at the time - often because the WAD PRE II and WD PRE 3 valve pre amplifiers had too much gain. The shunt mod moved the useable section on the volume control.
Ali Tait
07-10-2015, 15:37
Yes that's the drawing from the WD forum.
I'm shocked that just ONE series resistor in each channel can make such a sonic difference (I think I really am going deaf now, as resistor tolerance would count more to me than type or maker in this case)...
Well, what I reported is true. I didn't make it up, and it wasn't just me who heard it, but Duncan - and he's a sceptical engineering type, not easily swayed by 'foo'! ;)
The design of the resistor and what materials are used is significant, especially in the case of the AN non-magnetic Tantalums (the 'winner' of the test), as their non-magnetic construction is said to sonically influence their performance, which is why many consider them better than the standard type, and also the old Shinkohs.
I can't say that was why we preferred them, but they were certainly streets ahead sonically of the other resistors we'd listened to up until that point. No question whatsoever.
Maker or cost I couldn't give the slightest shit about. I'm not influenced by such things, and was quite prepared to use the Caddocks (as I really liked what they did), with Duncan in agreement, until the AudioNotes went in. In the final analysis, Dave, I'll always trust my ears over anything else!
Marco.
Well there's a thing - a valve power amp that's quieter than a SS pre..
Gary, will bring the Slagle passive over. Free on Friday if you are?
yup, free Friday mate.
lemme know what time n stuff when you know.
Yes, you can clearly hear the differences in the shunted resistor in this sort of setup. All this was tried ten years ago on the WAD forum with just the same results. Its worth pointing out that you can (and I often do) use a shunt with a conventional pot to remove much of the sound of the pot. I do have to point out that I sugested that this was the best solution some pages ago and was told it "just didnt feel right" or some such. But hey ho.
Lol... Indeed, but I was basing it on my experience of a shunted Glasshouse Takman stepped attenuator I fitted to the Croft a few years back, which because of the reduction in gain caused by shunting (chucking away some voltage), sounded soft and lacklustre. When a (non-shunted) DACT unit was fitted instead, it was like someone had lifted a pair of drapes from over the speakers!!
Therefore, at that point, until I tried it with the Goldpoint, shunted, for me = bad. However, the way that Duncan's wired things this time, in this application, has produced a rather different result, and sounds superb :)
If experience tells you that the shunt resistors equally influence the sound, then that's good enough for me, but I will still try it for myself, as I prefer learning through my own experiences.
You may have thought that places like HiFi collective sell their wide range of components just to pander to fools, no, these things do matter, the reason manufactures don’t normally use them is simple, cost and the effect on their profit margin.
Spot on! HFC don't sell 'foo', but tried and tested products and components that, if implemented correctly, should effect genuine sonic improvements. Nick (at HFC) wouldn't stock them otherwise.
Marco.
An engineer can certainly explain the circuit, but won't necessarily understand the sonic implications. In fact, an engineering background may well bias against hearing any difference. Not in all cases, obviously, or there would be very few advances in sonics.
Indeed, and we see it all the time on forums, from engineers who display rather too much cynicism/rigid thinking, together with a painfully closed mind. If it's not in 'Johnny's book of scientific facts', it's automatically dismissed as imagined! :doh:
Thankfully, Nick's not like that, and neither are others here from an electronics engineering background, whose technical abilities and ears I rate. Because of what you've outlined, I also don't buy the 'designer always knows best' mantra, as quite simply, they don't - not *always*!
Marco.
Hiss not terrible, and you certainly dont hear it when musics playing even at low volumes.
Now VERY interested in a good quality passive pre and what it can do for overall system sound.
Marco,
hope you can bring your over to mine when up this way. :)
No worries, matey. I'll certainly have the Goldpoint with me when I come up, It should be almost finished by then. I know exactly what you mean about hiss or hum, as I get a similar thing (hum, although it is very low-level) when the Croft is connected to the Copper amp.
The problem is, as Nick will know from experience, you can design equipment to be silent in use, measurably, and also in your test system, but when a customer uses it in a different context, with another preamp and different equipment in the equation, then unpredictable things can happen!
My issue with the Croft I suspect is down to an earth loop somewhere, but tracing what's responsible is a ball-ache... However, when the Goldpoint is used with the Copper amp, I get total silence! And that's one of the reasons (amongst other things) why I'm keen to get the Goldpoint to replace the Croft, for line-level duties, and then use the latter simply as a high-quality phono stage.
By the time I'm finished optimising the Goldpoint (and there is plenty to do yet), I'm almost certain that goal will be achieved :cool:
Marco.
Yes that's it - that picture looks like the one that was used on the WAD forum. Several people used that mod at the time - often because the WAD PRE II and WD PRE 3 valve pre amplifiers had too much gain. The shunt mod moved the useable section on the volume control.
Well that maybe one reason but it depended on the value of the series resistor, certainly the main motivation for doing it was the improvement in sound quality. What shocked everybody at the time was the quite marked differences between resistors and not everybody agreed on what was the best! ;)
My issue with the Croft I suspect is down to an earth loop somewhere, but tracing what's responsible is a ball-ache... However, when the Goldpoint is used with the Copper amp, I get total silence! And that's one of the reasons (amongst other things) why I'm keen to get the Goldpoint to replace the Croft, for line-level duties, and then use the latter simply as a high-quality phono stage.
Marco.
Is it something stupid like an earth loop (both Croft and Copper amp earthed)? If they both are, just disconnect the earth from the Croft (I'm suggesting leaving the earth on the Cooper amp unless Anthony says otherwise).
If it's not an earth loop, but noise transmitted from the preamp, an unpopular (I suspect) but definite reduction would be if the levels from pre to power were reduced slightly (by reducing preamp line-stage gain somehow). The volume control would need to be set higher for the same sound output, but background hum and hiss would go down.
Just a thought or two before the Croft is condemned ;) to phono stage only duties...
Good suggestion, and I may look into that, if it's noise transmitted from the preamp. I've tried the earth-lifting thing, and that doesn't really make any difference.
Thing is, based on what I'm hearing with the Goldpoint, even now in its non-fully optimised state, I can tell that it has the potential to usurp the Croft, on line-level. Therefore, noise or not, I think that's they way things are likely to go.
The other point to bear in mind is that no matter how much I end up spending on the Goldpoint, if it does eventually outperform the Croft, that amount will pale into insignificance when compared with what the Croft has cost, all in, with all the mods that have been carried out to it, most of which incidentally also influence the performance of the phono stage ;)
Therefore, even if the Goldpoint ends up costing me a grand, doing what I need to do to it, the end result will be worth it, as I'm confident it would compete favourably with many, much more costly commercial designs on the market - and that's the whole point of this project, as was the whole point of anything else I've modified: to end up with something that delivers the highest SPPV, and it's not necessarily about doing it cheaply, simply as effectively as possible.
Also, I'm enjoying learning new things as I go along (something I wouldn't otherwise have been able to do if I'd simply gotten someone to build me a passive preamp from scratch), as I've never professed to be an 'expert' of any kind; merely someone with discerning ears, who knows what a good sound is, and wants to hear his music at its absolute best. It's FUN, and in my world, that's what life is about!
Besides, what else should I waste my disposable income on? :D
Marco.
Good suggestion, and I may look into that, if it's noise transmitted from the preamp. I've tried the earth-lifting thing, and that doesn't really make any difference.
Thing is, based on what I'm hearing with the Goldpoint, even now in its non-fully optimised state, I can tell that it has the potential to usurp the Croft, on line-level. Therefore, noise or not, I think that's they way things are likely to go.
The other point to bear in mind is that no matter how much I end up spending on the Goldpoint, if it does eventually outperform the Croft, that amount will pale into insignificance when compared with what the Croft has cost, all in, with all the mods that have been carried out to it, most of which incidentally also influence the performance of the phono stage ;)
Therefore, even if the Goldpoint ends up costing me a grand, doing what I need to do to it, the end result will be worth it, as I'm confident it would compete favourably with many more costly commercial designs on the market - and that's the whole point of this project, as was the whole point of anything else I've modified: to end up with something that delivers the highest SPPV, and it's not necessarily about doing it cheaply, simply as effectively as possible.
Also, I'm enjoying learning new things as I go along (something I wouldn't otherwise have been able to do if I simply got someone to build me a passive preamp from scratch), as I've never professed to be an 'expert' of any kind; merely someone with discerning ears, who knows what a good sound is, and wants to hear his music at its absolute best. It's FUN, and in my world, that's what life is about.
Besides, what else should I waste my disposable income on? :D
Marco.
Me!;)
Oh, don't worry, we support the Cat Protection League (don't believe in owning pedigree cats, and much prefer moggies), as we do many other charities and good causes. I also enjoy spoiling Del!
Just remember that the Goldpoint project was never about doing things 'sensibly', methodically or cost-effectively: it was about having some fun, learning in the process, and using that knowledge to the greatest benefit in my system.
When I bought the Goldpoint, I knew full well what was likely going to be done to it. It was never EVER designed to be 'fit and forget, or 'plug & play'!
It amuses me no end that others who don't possess the confidence to trust their ears over what a commercial equipment manufacturer has deemed as being 'correct', or practice lateral thinking, seek to ridicule and demean my approach to audio.
It says far more about them than it does about me... Unlike them, I don't need a 'guru' to follow or tell me what's best, as I'm capable of making my own decisions. I just laugh at folk who don't have the gumption to go their own route (and blindly follow someone else's approach), as I know there's a very good chance I'll end up with a far better system than they ever will! ;)
Marco.
Me!;)
Wait 'till you see what I've got you for Xmas, dahling! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Wait 'till you see what I've got you for Xmas, dahling! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Hope it doesnt strap on;)
No, but it's rather slinky! :eyebrows:
Marco.
The Black Adder
07-10-2015, 20:25
No worries, matey. I'll certainly have the Goldpoint with me when I come up, It should be almost finished by then. I know exactly what you mean about hiss or hum, as I get a similar thing (hum, although it is very low-level) when the Croft is connected to the Copper amp.
The problem is, as Nick will know from experience, you can design equipment to be silent in use, measurably, and also in your test system, but when a customer uses it in a different context, with another preamp and different equipment in the equation, then unpredictable things can happen!
My issue with the Croft I suspect is down to an earth loop somewhere, but tracing what's responsible is a ball-ache... However, when the Goldpoint is used with the Copper amp, I get total silence! And that's one of the reasons (amongst other things) why I'm keen to get the Goldpoint to replace the Croft, for line-level duties, and then use the latter simply as a high-quality phono stage.
By the time I'm finished optimising the Goldpoint (and there is plenty to do yet), I'm almost certain that goal will be achieved :cool:
Marco.
Yep, there is an earth loop between the Croft and the Copper... That's why I had an earth lift switch put on the Croft.
Cheers, Jo. Unfortunately, lifting the earth on the Croft has little to no effect here.
Like I said, the hum is very low-level, and can only be heard when putting your ears right up to the speakers. Part of the problem, I suspect, is that because the Tannoys are so efficient, and the Copper amp so sensitive, any tiny bit of residual noise in the system, most likely hidden by other (much less efficient) speakers or sensitive amps, is ruthlessly revealed!
The good thing is that employing the Goldpoint completely eliminates all noise, and so with its potential to usurp the Croft, sonically, for line-level duties, it'll be a win-win :)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 21:15
Cheers, Jo. Unfortunately, lifting the earth on the Croft has little to no effect here.
I have been adding this to everything I make or mod. http://www.epanorama.net/newepa/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/earth-f4.gif But with a 20 ohm resistor. I use a binding post on the chassis and another insulated binding post for external signal earth connections. Sort of belt and braces.
http://sound.westhost.com/earthing.htm
Here's one I did earlier. ;)
http://i1134.photobucket.com/albums/m604/awkwardbydesign/Mobile%20Uploads/20150911_181916_zpscczd9jsr.jpg
Sorry, Richard, you'll need to explain what it does in layman's terms, as it's just a load of squiggly lines and components to me!
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 22:41
Sorry, Richard, you'll need to explain what it does in layman's terms, as it's just a load of squiggly lines and components to me!
Marco.
:rolleyes: Right, mains earth is connected to the case. Never disconnect that. From there (back of the binding post), 2 yellow and green wires go to the AC terminals on the bridge rectifier. From the + and - terminals the blue wires go to a screw post which is insulated from the chassis, and then to an insulated binding post (green wire heading out of view to the right). The white resistor and small blue capacitor are wired from chassis ground to signal ground (zero volt line on the circuit diagram). The toroidal transformer and circuit board are nothing to do with it, they are for charging the battery and powering the the remote control boards.
All clear now?
Or just ask a grown-up. :lol:
What it does is provide a safe path to earth via a resistor to drop earth loop current low enough to have no audible effect. The cap allows VHF through to earth, and the high current rectifier provides a failsafe.
:rolleyes: Right, mains earth is connected to the case. Never disconnect that. From there (back of the binding post), 2 yellow and green wires go to the AC terminals on the bridge rectifier. From the + and - terminals the blue wires go to a screw post which is insulated from the chassis, and then to an insulated binding post (green wire heading out of view to the right). The white resistor and small blue capacitor are wired from chassis ground to signal ground (zero volt line on the circuit diagram). The toroidal transformer and circuit board are nothing to do with it, they are for charging the battery and powering the the remote control boards.
All clear now?
Or just ask a grown-up. :lol:
as clear as mud :)
Lol - yup. Kind of!
So now that you've outlined what's going on. What is the purpose of what you've done, and how might it cure the issue I'm having with hum, when the Croft is connected to the Copper amp? :)
You're assuming that what you've just written is self-explanatory, in that respect. Unfortunately however, it isn't unless you're a 'techy'.
Marco.
as clear as mud :)
Indeed! We is audiophiles and music lovers, not circuit designers ;)
When I go to a restaurant and have a meal, I judge the quality of the food using my experience of what good food is supposed to taste like, based on what I'm used to eating at home, and what I've experienced eating in good restaurants over many years.
Don't ask me to cook the bloody stuff, though! :D
It's the same with hi-fi..... I'm simply an 'end user', not a builder. However, contrary to some, that doesn't make me any less skilled at what I *am* actually good at: identifying a good sound when I hear it and commenting accordingly.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 22:51
God, and you people are fiddling with electric equipment? Care in the community or what! :mental:
(I've had a drink. Can you tell?) :rfl:
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 22:53
Lol - yup. Kind of!
So now that you've outlined what's going on. What is the purpose of what you've done, and how might it cure the issue I'm having with hum, when the Croft is connected to the Copper amp? :)
You're assuming that what you've just written is self-explanatory, in that respect. Unfortunately however, it isn't unless you're a 'techy'.
Marco.
Sorry, I added an explanation after you posted. Go back and have a look now.
walpurgis
07-10-2015, 22:59
(I've had a drink. Can you tell?) :rfl:
At least it makes you seem less Er, stern? sombre? serious? Than usual. :)
(I've had a beer or two myself, otherwise I wouldn't have dared :eek: ;))
God, and you people are fiddling with electric equipment? Care in the community or what! :mental:
(I've had a drink. Can you tell?) :rfl:
Not really, you're as daft as ever! :D
It's not me fiddling with electronic equipment, but a friend who knows what he's doing. I'm just the one who pays for the bits and judges whether the end results sound any good or not!!
Marco.
P.S It's handy having friends who are willing to help. Some poor sods elsewhere don't appear to enjoy that luxury... ;)
awkwardbydesign
07-10-2015, 23:04
Before I listen to some actual music with a glass of Tesco's finest discounted Primitivo, I'd just like to say i find it fascinating that those who have no technical knowledge , those who have a little (me), and those who have bloody degrees in it , can all argue about it.
But obviously I'm right.
Ive got city and guilds ;) and was a class 1 engineer for longer than I care to remember.:lol:
walpurgis
07-10-2015, 23:11
I got my 'cycling proficiency' certificate when I was eleven. :)
Before I listen to some actual music with a glass of Tesco's finest discounted Primitivo, I'd just like to say i find it fascinating that those who have no technical knowledge , those who have a little (me), and those who have bloody degrees in it , can all argue about it.
Indeed, and crucially not fall out, even if we disagree!
It's called being polite and able to respect the opinions of others, without thinking that you're always right and know it all. That doesn't often happen on other forums, especially those run by a manufacturer who [amongst other things] suffers from acute solipsism ;)
Marco.
I got my 'cycling proficiency' certificate when I was eleven. :)
Cool. I got my first gobble when I was 12. Does that count? :D
Marco.
Cool. I got my first gobble when I was 12. Does that count? :D
Marco.
Na.. aint goin' there;)
walpurgis
07-10-2015, 23:28
Cool. I got my first gobble when I was 12. Does that count? :D
Marco.
Only if you got a certificate! :lol:
It gave her a wide smile and a 'gobstopper' she'll never forget! Will that do? :D :eyebrows:
Marco.
Lol - the old man had a chippy, so no shortage of sweets to sell (at vast profits) to other kids in the school playground! That was the start of my entrepreneurial flair.... ;)
Marco.
Works for me:D if you've got it...Use It!!, and Smile, Smile, Smile :lol:
Lol... Happy days!
Btw, the most profitable one was cigarettes. Made a killing on those ;)
Marco.
Used to sell singles myself:doh:
Until you got caught? ;)
Used to love getting the belt and watching the (usually fat, baldy old headmaster) huffing and puffing, trying unsuccessfully to inflict pain on me, while I just stood and grinned :D
Marco.
When I got to 14 I just refused and there was nowt they could do bar send me to the rector. As I was the golden goose the won the school all its trophies he just asked me to be more discrete. as for non appearance in classes, he gave me the idea of appearing at role call in morning and then pissing off if that was my desire(as long as I put in the training and won those golds) ;) surprisingly life has been pretty much the same since. ....if you are making it for the boss he just accepts your foibles if he has any sense ....did the same myself
Indeed! We is audiophiles and music lovers, not circuit designers ;)
Well, quite. Which is why there's no point in asking for an explanation if you can't understand the explanation, or if you need it simplifying to the point where it's meaningless! That's where I'm at; if I like the sound of something, that's good enough for me. When the talk turns techy, my eyes glaze over and my mind starts wandering.
Same here, Joe, but as Richard was kind enough to post what he did, I thought it only polite to ask what it meant :)
Marco.
Same here, Joe, but as Richard was kind enough to post what he did, I thought it only polite to ask what it meant :)
Marco.
It might as well be in Mandarin Chinese or Sanskrit for all the sense it made to me, even in a 'dumbed down' version. I'm not proud of my ignorance, I really ought to educate myself in at least the basics, but partly out of laziness and partly out of disinclination, I never have. Which is why I stick to stuff that 'just works'.
Fairy muff. I'm marginally more curious.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
08-10-2015, 10:52
It might be worth looking at the circuit diagram I posted and trying to match it to the explanation and the photo. I did it that way so you could. I started by just reading simple circuit diagrams (which this is) and went from there. I still don't understand complicated stuff, but this is just like a drawing of a cabinet or a kitchen plan.
A lot of us have a reluctance to try (don't ask me anything about computers!), but starting with something simple is often a way into a new interest. A bit like jazz? :eek:
It might be worth looking at the circuit diagram I posted and trying to match it to the explanation and the photo.
I did and the article you linked to certainly made it clear to me what it all did and how it might eliminate earth loop hum, although electronics is still 75% magic and hocus pocus to me so I don't really understand how it really works...
I have a slight hum with my current set up but wether I would go the extra mile to add a circuit like this (although relatively simple) is a different kettle of fish.
The Black Adder
08-10-2015, 11:22
I used to sell copied video games as we were the first to get a 'twin' cassette deck... unfortunately, it was short lived of course as everyone got them.
I made £50 in a week!
Strange though... our deck used to copy games at high speed much better and with less errors than at normal speed.
awkwardbydesign
08-10-2015, 11:25
I did and the article you linked to certainly made it clear to me what it all did and how it might eliminate earth loop hum, although electronics is still 75% magic and hocus pocus to me so I don't really understand how it really works...
I have a slight hum with my current set up but wether I would go the extra mile to add a circuit like this (although relatively simple) is a different kettle of fish.
Ha, me too!
I am using a TVC at the moment, and there is STILL a little hum. So although this circuit will eliminate most causes of hum, it won't remove all of them.
But as I make or mod stuff regularly, adding this is no big deal.
... I have a slight hum with my current set up but wether I would go the extra mile to add a circuit like this (although relatively simple) is a different kettle of fish...
I too have a very slight hum from my super cheap valve pre amp, and this has inspired me to plan a visit to Maplins later this afternoon, so I'll cetainly be trying out the circuit. Funnily enough I know the ESP website quite well having built a couple of Rod Elliott's amps, but had not stumbled accross that particular article before - it looks pretty good.
awkwardbydesign
08-10-2015, 12:07
You might be amused to know that I first saw this circuit when Paul (Reffc) was a member of HiFiWigwam and posted it there! It's no longer on his site, and it took a bit of searching to find it again. So thanks to him for bringing it to my notice.
anubisgrau
09-10-2015, 17:16
who's gonna borrow marco a decent AVC or TVC?
just jokin'
:lol:
who's gonna borrow marco a decent AVC or TVC?
just jokin'
:lol:
Not me...mine is indecent
Audio Advent
09-10-2015, 19:24
Yes, but the Z-Foils might make it there in yet! ;)
Marco.
I'm a bit late to this thread - things have moved on from this post..
Those leads on the z-foils were rather long so they might improve if they were trimmed down and installed. I'd guess it was possible for them to act a little like radio aerials as tested.
Stratmangler
09-10-2015, 19:54
I'm a bit late to this thread - things have moved on from this post..
Those leads on the z-foils were rather long so they might improve if they were trimmed down and installed. I'd guess it was possible for them to act a little like radio aerials as tested.
Go back a bit and you'll find out the reason why the legs were left long.
Audio Advent
09-10-2015, 19:57
Gah... too many pages.
Stratmangler
09-10-2015, 20:07
Ah well, it's your choice :)
Light Dependant Resistor
09-10-2015, 20:14
The well established method of star grounding, that is treating each
of the many paths returning current to have its own return to a central location,
which is in almost every case to chassis, and for chassis to have mandatory
grounding to the household ground, will solve the majority of unbalanced audio
system grounding issues.
Unbalanced vs Balanced audio is explained here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo5HhfIUSP0
Sadly we keep on using unbalanced audio devices, or unbalanced audio equipment lacking
method of ground loop breaking, which can be greatly assisted to include
at low level stages transformer, or optical transfer. To use these methods in unbalanced systems
will invariably improve signal to noise ratio, the result is more music enjoyment. and explains
why transformer or audio optocouplers should be used widely.
More or very problematic grounding, needs further methods of isolation, and
to the rescue are loop breaker circuits. http://sound.westhost.com/earthing.htm
Cheers / Chris
Gah... too many pages.
Hi Sam,
They were left long simply for testing, in case I wanted to sell any of the 'losing' resistors on :)
A bit of an update actually... I had mentioned that I needed to try the Z-Foils in my system, before settling on either those or the AN Tants, well good job I tried them because they are SUBERB! :eek:
I had been enjoying the ANs for the last few days, but had detected a slight bloom in the lower-midrange area, causing female vocals to sound a touch too warm and cuddly, for my liking (this is after the ANs having burned in a bit since I first listened to them).
Therefore, I popped along to Duncan's place to have the Z-foils fitted again, as well as to listen to the Shinkohs I'd ordered (in 18K). Anyway, we fitted the latter first, as they're supposed to be similar to the AN Tants.... Dunc liked them, but I wasn't really keen, finding them a bit of a soulless listen, compared with the ANs. Yes, they sounded tighter and were pretty detailed with nothing overtly wrong, but the 'magic' was gone, and their addictive musicality, as described in my earlier review when the An Tants first went in.
So we popped the Z-Foils in (after cutting the legs down as short as possible) and both of us were blown away by the improvement these brought about, over the Shinkohs, in terms of top-end extension, air and space and a beautifully liquid sounding midrange. Low-end frequencies were also taught, defined and well extended: in short, the Z-Foils just seemed to let music flow rather effortlessly. They also appeared to have no overt sonic signature, and exhibited a rather addictive 'hear-though' quality with all recordings. Mesmerising stuff! :)
Therefore, I headed home to try them in my system, and proceeded to play some of the music I had been listening to recently with the AN Tants.
Bear in mind too, that the Z-Foils are 20K, compared with the 22K of the ANs, which appears to be the magic value for my system, ensuring that the sound has enough 'balls' lower down on the volume controls, where I want my normal listening levels to be, in order to keep the shunt resistor count down (more on that later).
Well, to cut a long story short, they did the same trick in my system, as they had in Duncan's, sounding 'fresher' and more musically 'alive', than the ANs, and highlighted that as good as the ANs were, they exhibited a slight tonal richness that wasn't entirely neutral, and which had been bothering me a little over the last few days.
That's totally gone now, leaving me with a truly superb wide-open sound - the best I've heard the Goldpoint sounding yet... So, in the final analysis, the Z-Foils won!
I always had a sneaking suspicion that they might triumph in the end, when I got to hear them in my system, and so it proved. Job done and dusted, and time now to allow the Z-Foils to burn in and just enjoy the music, until the LDR Stereo Coffee unit arrives. That will certainly be an interesting one, and it will have to go some in order to oust the Goldpoint, as right now the latter is the finest sounding passive preamp I've heard to date :cool:
More when the LDR arrives (sometime later this week)!
Marco.
Stratmangler
09-10-2015, 22:24
Hi Sam,
They were left long simply for testing, in case I wanted to sell any of the 'losing' resistors on :)
You're no fun, just spilling the beans like that :rolleyes:
Lol - the poor lad was obviously tired! ;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
09-10-2015, 22:26
With his heart bleeding all over the place elsewhere on the forum?
I thought the distraction of hunting for something might help :eyebrows:
Lol - the poor lad was obviously tired! ;)
Marco.
here was me thinking I was gettin' the "Z's" too :D ....Glad its worked out; its always nice when a plan comes together
Indeed... Shows that it pays to be thorough! :exactly:
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 08:04
That's totally gone now, leaving me with a truly superb wide-open sound - the best I've heard the Goldpoint sounding yet... So, in the final analysis, the Z-Foils won!
Marco.
Told you so! :ner:
I haven't checked Texas Components site to see if they are different from their own Z-foils, which is what I use. You can play with that idea, if you want.
BTW, non inductive wire-wound resistors can exhibit some of the lowest Johnson noise, so I wonder if they would work here. A bit big though!
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 08:12
More or very problematic grounding, needs further methods of isolation, and
to the rescue are loop breaker circuits. http://sound.westhost.com/earthing.htm
Cheers / Chris
Keep up Chris, I've just explained all that to the technically challenged*! :lol:
On the bench I have temporarily disconnected the mains earth to isolate a hum problem once or twice, but that is SO dangerous in general use. Do not try this at home, kids.
* That is, even more than I am!
Told you so! :ner:
I haven't checked Texas Components site to see if they are different from their own Z-foils, which is what I use. You can play with that idea, if you want.
BTW, non inductive wire-wound resistors can exhibit some of the lowest Johnson noise, so I wonder if they would work here. A bit big though!
Just to get slightly real here for a moment, I will quote Wiki, it says it best
"Thermal noise is intrinsic to all resistors and is not a sign of poor design or manufacture, although resistors may also have excess noise."
Wire wound resistors may have lower other noise, but Johnson noise is only dependent on the resistance not the construction.
I would not worry overly over resistor noise in a line level passive. The 100k resistor at the front of the power amp will be generating more noise than the preamp resistors.
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 10:22
Just to get slightly real here for a moment, I will quote Wiki, it says it best
"Thermal noise is intrinsic to all resistors and is not a sign of poor design or manufacture, although resistors may also have excess noise."
Wire wound resistors may have lower other noise, but Johnson noise is only dependent on the resistance not the construction.
I would not worry overly over resistor noise in a line level passive. The 100k resistor at the front of the power amp will be generating more noise than the preamp resistors.
One of the problems with quoting Wikipedia is that it often generalises and is not thoroughly checked. I was referring to manufacturers' specs.
Thermal noise probably isn't a problem at these levels, but then the idea that resistors sound different is - resisted! :D
but then the idea that resistors sound differentt is - resisted!
Oh, they most certainly do!
However, let's not lose sight of the fact that the best resistor is NO resistor. Therefore, the 'best' one, in that respect, is the one that 'sounds' as if it's not there! ;)
For me, the Z-Foils do that 'disappearing' trick better than the others I've heard.
Marco.
Incidentally, just a further note on the Shinkohs and AN Tant (non-magnetics). It was pretty clear to us that the latter were, musically, in a different league - and I can go into the required detail if necessary. Therefore, I would say that for those looking to use Tantalum types of resistor, the AN non-mags are the daddies! :)
Even though the Shinkohs weren't fully burnt in, they would've had to transform themselves at the level of going from almost black to white, to have competed with the ANs. The latent potential simply wasn't there, IMO, to have allowed them to usurp the ANs, even after a longer burn-in period. Furthermore, I had a judgement call to make, unless I wanted to spend weeks on end testing resistors!
There's a point during these experiments where you have to say: 'job done' and be confident that you've made the right choice.
In that respect, I'm totally satisfied that the Z-Foils are the best resistors to use in the Goldpoint. As ever, though, that may not be the case in other applications, where Shinkohs could be better. In that respect, it'll be interesting comparing Macca's NVA passive, with the Goldpoint, at the forthcoming NEBO event in November.
Marco.
Guess it will depend on what else is in the system as to a possible winner unless its in your face better...interesting read it will make as obviously i wont be there
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 11:22
There's a point where you have to say 'job done' and be confident that you've made the right choice. In that respect, I'm very satisfied that the Z-Foils are the best resistors to use in the Goldpoint. As ever, though, that may not be the case in other applications, where Shinkohs could be better. In that respect, it'll be interesting comparing Macca's NVA passive, with the Goldpoint, at the forthcoming NEBO event in November.
Marco.
And initially you liked the extra weight of the ANs. I wonder if the time or mood make a difference to our choices too. In my DAC I wanted a clean sound, but now some extra "authority" might be welcomed.
BTW, the Mills MRA5 wirewounds are available in 20k and 22k. Go on, you know you want to! :lol:
One of the problems with quoting Wikipedia is that it often generalises and is not thoroughly checked. I was referring to manufacturers' specs.
Thermal noise probably isn't a problem at these levels, but then the idea that resistors sound different is - resisted! :D
I was quoting Wiki because it saved me typing. As it happens there is a error on the page I quoted from, but its not in that quote. You may have been quoting manufactures specs, I was repeating well known and understood physics. The thermal noise of a resistor is dependent on its resistance and nothing else. Makers can work at reducing other noise sources but they cant touch thermal noise, thats written into the fabric of the universe. I was not claiming that resistors don't sound. different, they do, I pointed this out several pages ago in fact.
I was just correcting your statement
"non inductive wire-wound resistors can exhibit some of the lowest Johnson noise"
which is flat wrong, every 20k resistor will produce exactly the same Johnson noise, what would have been correct is:
"non inductive wire-wound resistors can exhibit some of the lowest overall noise"
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 11:38
OK, which might make them worth trying. Actually that strengthens my point, so thanks for that.
Guess it will depend on what else is in the system as to a possible winner unless its in your face better...interesting read it will make as obviously i wont be there
Oh, most certainly. Passive preamps are up there as one of the most system-dependent components there is, so much will depend on which one the test power amp 'likes' best, and vice versa. Most important of all is that the source used has a healthy (min) 2V output, in order to drive the various passives properly. That will make or break results further down the chain.
In that respect, it's probably advisable for the source used to be digital. The last thing you'd want is a 'weedy' cartridge and/or phono stage upsetting the apple cart.
Also crucial will be placing the partnering equipment in such a way that the shortest possible interconnects can be used with the passives being tested - and those interconnects must also be low-loss, low-capacitance types. However, returning to my situation, I'm satisfied that I've got the Goldpoint where I want it to be for now.
I now only have one 'audiophile-grade' resistor in series with the signal path (the Z-Foils), and with having maximised the available volume on the lower steps of the switches (by using the optimal value of resistor for my system for that job: 20K), and with how the Goldpoint attenuators work, with less shunt resistors used in the early steps, than further up, I've optimised things for use at my favourite listening levels, positions 3-10, on the available 47 steps.
There will be some experiments carried out in due course with the shunts, in terms of upgrading them if necessary. However, based on what I'm hearing now (the sound is so open, detailed, dynamic and goddamn musical), I'm confident that their sonic effect is not as significant as that of the series resistors, and also that the shunt resistors currently fitted to the Goldpoint attenuators (SMT Nichrome) are already very good.
Quite simply, if they were seriously crap and holding things back to a notable degree, Duncan and I would've been able to hear it. Judging now by the performance of the Goldpoint, there's just no way that's the case. However, that's not to say that they can't be improved, but they're definitely NOT acting as a significant bottleneck :nono:
Here's an interesting article to read on the subject, and also on Audio Signal Attenuators in general: http://www.blackdahlia.com/html/tip_67.html
In terms of this discussion, this bit is most relevant:
The advantage of a series attenuator is that you only have one switch contact in the path. The disadvantage is that all 24 resistors are in the signal path all the time. Normally one would observe that the disadvantage out weighs the advantage, but it’s not so simple, as this type has received a new lease of life with the likes of DACT (which is a highly regarded piece of kit), and the much better priced Goldpoint attenuator. DACT and Goldpoint both take advantage of surface mount technology (SMT) type resistors, which are very small in size, meaning the 24 resistors can be tightly packed in a manner that almost resembles a single resistor. What I mean to suggest is this. Imagine a single resistive tract cut into 24 small pieces, and then soldered together, with switch contact between. If you can implement this neatly – tightly spaced and clean – then you start to feel a whole lot better about the series attenuator approach. DACT and Goldpoint do exactly this, thanks to SMT.
The emboldened text reflects my own experience of using controls with SMT-type resistors, as the DACT series-type attenuator I use in the Croft outperformed any shunted 'boutique resistor'-based attenuators I'd used in the past, which certainly confirms the theory that not all SMT-type resistors are bad. Again, as with many things in audio, it's all about context and implementation!
Therefore, given the above, it's no surprise then that the Nichrome resistors, employed by Goldpoint on their attenuators, aren't letting the side down. Indeed, quite the opposite, as they appear to be pretty much sonically transparent, which is why I'm in no hurry to replace them.
In terms of this bit from the above article, I quote:
"The advantage of a series attenuator is that you only have one switch contact in the path. The disadvantage is that all 24 resistors are in the signal path all the time", whilst unquestionably a truism, what Duncan has done, by rewiring the switches on the Goldpoint (as he outlined earlier), is provided me with a 'shunt-type' device, where as mentioned before, only one series resistor is line-line with the signal path, at any point on the switches, and depending on that position, will result in how many shunt resistors are being used: at position 1, one, and at position 47, forty seven, which is why it pays for me to achieve maximum available volume on the early steps!
Now, with having maxed out the low-level volume available on the early steps of the dials, by fitting the optimal value of series resistor (for my system), I will rarely, if ever, need to use the controls beyond position 12, which means that a maximum of 12 shunt resistors would be in use at any one time. However, in reality only 3, to a maximum of 10 resistors will be used, as positions 3-10 on the dials is where 95% of my listening will be done.
Therefore, if we consider that because the shunt resistors currently being employed in the Goldpoint are high-quality Nichrome SMT-types (as favoured after extensive research by Goldpoint), and that the principle behind using SMTs is, as the article above says, so that: "resistors can be tightly packed in a manner that almost resembles a single resistor", then effectively with using a maximum of 10, tiny, tightly-packed SMT-type shunt resistors, at the loudest positions on the dials I'm liable to use, then it seems feasible that, as claimed, those are indeed behaving similar to a single resistor.
That, coupled with the way Duncan has rewired the Goldpoint switches, so that only one series resistor is in line with the signal path, is probably why the sound I'm getting now is so good!!
It's also why I'm now in no hurry to change anything else, and simply allow all the new resistors to burn-in. Later on, I will experiment with replacing the Nichrome shunts, with Z-foils, which would probably be the ultimate, but for now, the stunning sound I'm getting is, shall we say, 'more than adequate'! :)
Marco.
Lodgesound
10-10-2015, 14:20
All very interesting reading this.
My only observation is that I do not understand why equipment at this level is not all balanced signal line - we use it in the industry for very good reasons.
Hi Stewart,
Indeed, but the advantages of a balanced signal line are only fully realised when the whole system, from input to output, is designed that way, including the cables connecting it all together, otherwise for me, it's not worth doing. It's 'all or nothing', really.
And while that's the norm in studios, etc, and thus easily and cost-effectively implemented with professional equipment, that's not the the case with 'domestic' hi-fi, as rarely are the circuits employed in such equipment designed to take advantage of a fully balanced signal line - so we make the best of what we have :)
Marco.
All very interesting reading this.
My only observation is that I do not understand why equipment at this level is not all balanced signal line - we use it in the industry for very good reasons.
Yep, but to be fair, those reasons are not particular applicable for home use.
"resistors can be tightly packed in a manner that almost resembles a single resistor"
Sorry, but that makes no sense. just because its small and if you squint it looks like a single resistor doesnt make it a single resistor. unlike the owner, audio doesnt care what it looks like, the reality is that SMD resistors are used because they are small and can be assembled to PCB's by automatic pick and place equipment. Then trying to reverse argue that because they are small and take up no space makes them in any way better sonically is just marketing bullshit. If you have 20 surface mount resistors or 20 of any type resistors you have 20 different resistive elements, and 40 contacts between the resistive element and the end conductor, and 40 end cap to PCB solder joint. With a single resistor you have 1 resistive element, two end caps, and two solder joints.
When it suits them they use the same but reversed argument when they make a thing of the advantage of only having the one switch contact in the signal.
Quite simply, if they were seriously crap and holding things back to a notable degree, Duncan and I would've been able to hear it.
But you could and did, thats exactly what you heard when you replaced the 30 or so surface mount resistors with a single shunt, the improvement you have heard (even with a cheap SINGLE metal film resistor) show that the SMD ones are not transparent as they claim.
Now, again, the shunt resistor(s) may have less effect on the sound than the series one, but I think its certain that it will have some. as you say, you may try this later so it will be interesting what you find.
If you are only using position 3-10 on the switch, if you decide to try single resistors, you may as well just use a 24 way switch and spread the values from to your current 10 over those points. You could use a 12 way switch, but I suspect psychologically you prefer the control to be in the lower half of its travel under normal use.
BTW (1), I am almost certain no engineer from Goldpoint has read thair web site, they would have noticed this mistake "The surface mounted resistors used on the Goldpoint V47s are 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a thermal noise specification (TCR) of 25 PPM, same as on our V24s,"
BTW (2), "let's not lose sight of the fact that the best resistor is NO resistor", hence the point of inductive designs.
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 15:24
BTW (1), I am almost certain no engineer from Goldpoint has read thair web site, they would have noticed this mistake "The surface mounted resistors used on the Goldpoint V47s are 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a thermal noise specification (TCR) of 25 PPM, same as on our V24s,"
What should it say?
Hi Nick,
Sorry, but that makes no sense. just because its small and if you squint it looks like a single resistor doesnt make it a single resistor. unlike the owner, audio doesnt care what it looks like, the reality is that SMD resistors are used because they are small and can be assembled to PCB's by automatic pick and place equipment. Then trying to reverse argue that because they are small and take up no space makes them in any way better sonically is just marketing bullshit. If you have 20 surface mount resistors or 20 of any type resistors you have 20 different resistive elements, and 40 contacts between the resistive element and the end conductor, and 40 end cap to PCB solder joint. With a single resistor you have 1 resistive element, two end caps, and two solder joints.
Ok, sure. I accept all that. None of it, though, automatically makes SMDs bad. The only reason I've highlighted Goldpoint's position on the matter (and what the above article outlined) is because it reflects my experience, and most importantly, it's what my ears tell me.
The DACT 'series'-type stepped attenuator in the Croft, which also uses SMD resistors, sounds superb, and to my ears is better than any 'conventional' attenuator, for example the Glasshouse Takman I had before it. Furthermore, in all the years I've used the DACT, on the Croft, I've never been tempted to upgrade it with different resistors, which I also think tells its own story... ;)
Therefore that fact, and given that the Goldpoint, fitted with similar SMD resistors (which I'm using now solely as shunts), sounds equally superb, proves to me that there's either something in what they say, or that SMD resistors aren't as bad as some folk think!
When it suits them they use the same but reversed argument when they make a thing of the advantage of only having the one switch contact in the signal.
Yes, but it is an undeniable advantage of series-type attenuators. SMD resistors also have shorter signal paths than the conventional variety. Both factors are likely to be partly responsible for the excellent results I'm getting.
But you could and did, thats exactly what you heard when you replaced the 30 or so surface mount resistors with a single shunt, the improvement you have heard (even with a cheap SINGLE metal film resistor) show that the SMD ones are not transparent as they claim.
Well, the biggest improvement would've been gained by introducing the shunt, and in the process removing all those resistors from the signal path, regardless of what type of resistors they were!
In that respect, I've no idea why Goldpoint don't design their series-type passive devices that way originally (as 'shunt-types', like how Duncan has done it, and in a way getting the best of both worlds), as for me, it's a no-brainer. I know that Goldpoint prefer the 'all-series' approach to passives, but it isn't the best way of doing things.
Shunt isn't always best either, especially in an active preamp, as some lower-gain devices don't like the subsequent reduction in gain, caused by reducing voltage (such as the Croft), and can sound soft and 'limp' as a result. Returning to the SMD resistors in the Goldpoint (now being uses as shunts), they may indeed not sound as good as Z-foils would in there, but my point is that they're definitely transparent enough not to act as a significant bottleneck!
Now, again, the shunt resistor(s) may have less effect on the sound than the series one, but I think its certain that it will have some. as you say, you may try this later so it will be interesting what you find.
Indeed. The plan eventually will be to replace the SMD shunts with Z-Foils. I'm pretty certain that will be better, but like I said, given the superb sound I'm enjoying at the moment, I'm in no real rush to go there :)
If you are only using position 3-10 on the switch, if you decide to try single resistors, you may as well just use a 24 way switch and spread the values from to your current 10 over those points. You could use a 12 way switch, but I suspect psychologically you prefer the control to be in the lower half of its travel under normal use.
Indeed, but I still like retaining the flexibility of more steps, in order if necessary, to accommodate the replay of very low-level recordings, such as can be the case sometimes with classical music. The extra steps are unlikely to be used, but I'd still rather they were there if I need them.
BTW (1), I am almost certain no engineer from Goldpoint has read thair web site, they would have noticed this mistake "The surface mounted resistors used on the Goldpoint V47s are 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a thermal noise specification (TCR) of 25 PPM, same as on our V24s,"
So what's their mistake?
BTW (2), "let's not lose sight of the fact that the best resistor is NO resistor", hence the point of inductive designs.
In order to understand your point I would need to know what an inductive design is, and how it differs from what I have....?
Marco.
Goldpoint's website quote should read: "... 0.5% Nichrome THIN film with a temperature coefficient of resistance (TCR) of 25ppm (/degC), same as on our V24s".
Just noticed this post, sorry Richard:
And initially you liked the extra weight of the ANs.
Yes, because I thought that weight was meant to be there. We got away with it more in Duncan's system, because he uses small (modern) stand-mount Tannoys. In my system, with much bigger and more revealing speakers, it was a different matter. In the final analysis, it appears that some of that weight was 'bloat', which isn't an effect I need or want. However, it did ameliorate a little with burn-in.
Therefore, for those interested in trying the AN Tants, it's something to bear in mind. Tonally, I don't think that they're entirely neutral, and veer towards the warm side of the equation, although they do sound very musical. The Z-Foils in no way lack weight: it's there when it's meant to be. They just don't superimpose it onto every recording, in the way that the AN Tants tended to, and they sound equally as musical, if not more so.
There is really no downside to the Z-Foils that I can detect. It's also entirely possible that, by originally leaving the legs so long for testing purposes, we didn't hear them properly first time round...
I'd say that in a bright and/or lightweight sounding system, the Z-foils may be too brutally honest (as they act as a veritable 'open window'), and so will reveal any system shortcomings. Therefore, the more forgiving, 'big-boned' presentation of the AN Tants may prove a better solution. At the end of the day, there is no 'one size fits all'. It's all about tuning the response of the components in your system, in order to create the most musically satisfying sound to your ears!
I wonder if the time or mood make a difference to our choices too. In my DAC I wanted a clean sound, but now some extra "authority" might be welcomed.
BTW, the Mills MRA5 wirewounds are available in 20k and 22k. Go on, you know you want to! :lol:
For sure, mood makes a difference to how we perceive the way equipment sounds. Fortunately, I'm in a good mood most days [nothing for me to be unhappy about], so I'm probably afflicted by that phenomenon a little less than others [especially some po-faced old malcontents elsewhere]! ;)
I looked at the Mills resistors, and indeed considered them, but I'm pretty sure that they wouldn't be in the same league as the Z-foils. These babies really do deserve their excellent reputation! :exactly:
Marco.
In that respect, here's an excellent summary of the Charcroft Z-Foils (copied from the earlier article I linked to), which mirrors my own experience to date with them:
That’s how things were until the Charcrofts arrived from the UK. Packaged elegantly in a black fold-over pouch, these Charcrofts certainly do look the part (see picture above). I selected 4 favorite LP’s for audition, and played a portion of each in turn before swapping the Shinkohs for Charcrofts, and then a re-listen afterwards to compare – “Brandenberg Concertos” by J. S. Bach on Decca, “Concored” by the Modern Jazz Quartet on Prestige, “Life Cycle” by David Holland on ECM, and “Jazz at the Pawnshop” on Prophone which is not really a musical favorite but is incredibly well recorded and a fine acid test nevertheless.
Lets be clear, I am changing but a single resistor in the audio chain. WOW! These Charcrofts are good – really very good. Listening to Bach, I immediately noted a deeper and more focused sound stage, and improvement to timing and pace. I especially hear a significant improvement to micro-dynamic contrasts, and from this a more lively and focused kind of sound, with the Charcrofts. The Charcrofts are beautifully clean and pure sounding, such that the Shinkohs seem a little veiled and slurred by comparison (but of course, Shinkohs are already very good). And, as is the case with the legendary Shinkoh resistor, there is no top lift or over etching in the highs from these Charcroft resistors.
The Charcrofts seem to be every bit as refined, as sweet, as organic and naturally integrated as the Shinkohs, it is just that the Charcrofts provide a cleaner window. On Jazz at the Pawnshop, improvement to timing and tempo got my feet tapping, and I could hear deeper into the background – you know, all those clinking tea cups and chattering amongst the audience. I also noticed that the clarinet was significantly more focused. The BassZilla is a dipole. Dipoles tend to give a wet, ambient sound, and at times the sound of a solo instrument can hover in the air, lacking a certain specificity in terms of image locality – err, exactly as you would hear at the live venue!
With the Shinkohs the clarinet was big, airy and a little vague, whereas with the Charcrofts the image was more focused, and locked in, whilst retained the big and airy, box less, natural spatialisation one expects from a good dipole. I could also follow the bass line with greater ease and could hear more texture and detail in the lows. The other two LP’s showcased the exact same type and degree of improvement, and I have say I am won over by the Charcrofts, so much so that I now wish to redesign my passive RIAA filter for use with a 100K series resistor, because I wish to replace my current Shinkohs with 100k Charcroft types (footnote 4). I think that comment says it all. Do the Charcrofts provide value for money – of course not (since when did the high-end ever offer ‘value for money’ as such)! Do they improve sound on a level that is worthwhile – you bet your bottom dollar they do.
Quite! :cool:
His opinion of the Shinkohs, in comparison, also reflects my own experience.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
10-10-2015, 23:11
I just made the effort to check, and it seems the Charcroft Z-foils are the same as the Texas. But Texas Components will make any value to any tolerance ( I go for 0.1%!), so I go direct to them.
Yeah, sure. I'd still just rather get them from HFC. Nick offers superb service, and if I need anything quickly, I can get it the next day! ;)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
11-10-2015, 08:17
Fair enough.
anthonyTD
11-10-2015, 11:34
Every change you make is always going to be system dependent,
For eg, You may find that changing one interconnect now will give a diffrent result than before, this unfortunetly is the nature of the beast, and in some respects can detract folk from the reason they got into HI Fi in the first place, ie; the music!
Our ears, and mood changes from day to day, which also has a big affect on how we percieve music, and sound, so, what may sound right one day, well,,, you get my gist, that is why when you get a system to a certain standard of quality, the final % of tuning will always be subjective, personal choice, and not necessarily fact! :)
Very true post #409.
Valve rolling persistently disturbs me. I'll be running, say, VT52, for a few days, then swap over to 6A3 and wonder why the hell I was ever listening to VT52. Then I'll swap back and think the reverse a few days later. The traits of the valves always appears to remain the same. What I prefer to listen to varies.
No soldering required, there, however.
EDIT: Which of course is not to belittle a little resistor rolling.
Indeed, Anthony... As a matter of interest, as you've chosen to fit DACT stepped attenuators, which utilise SMD resistors, in your (£5k?) Soul Mate preamps [and have done for some time], what's your view on their inherent sonic qualities and/or technical suitability for that job, in terms of them maximising signal integrity? :)
Interesting your point about cables. I wasn't sure if the Goldpoint, being a passive device, would 'like' the MC5000s as much as the Croft does, but there's no difference (no lack of drive or 'oomph'), which shows that they're very good (versatile and transparent) cables.
It's important to keep them as short as possible though (with a passive), as I discovered when I tried a 1m pair from my DAC to the Goldpoint, instead of the 0.5m pair normally used. That had quite a profound negative impact on the sound.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
11-10-2015, 12:42
Every change you make is always going to be system dependent,
For eg, You may find that changing one interconnect now will give a diffrent result than before, this unfortunetly is the nature of the beast, and in some respects can detract folk from the reason they got into HI Fi in the first place, ie; the music!
Our ears, and mood changes from day to day, which also has a big affect on how we percieve music, and sound, so, what may sound right one day, well,,, you get my gist, that is why when you get a system to a certain standard of quality, the final % of tuning will always be subjective, personal choice, and not necessarily fact! :)
As Homer Simpson says "Facts are meaningless, they can be used to prove anything.
you can come up with statistics to prove anything, Forty percent of all people know that.:eyebrows:
My view is: in the final analysis (after any objective testing/research has been done), trust your God-given senses [and your ears], as ultimately they're more reliable for assessing how hi-fi equipment sounds than any man-made measurements can ever be!
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
11-10-2015, 14:11
trust your God-given senses [and your ears],
Marco.
So, where did you get YOUR ears?
Tesco (buy one , get one free)! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Tesco (buy one , get one free)! :eyebrows:
Marco.
Tesco often tell Marco to BOGOF! :D
you can come up with statistics to prove anything, Forty percent of all people know that.:eyebrows:
"Lies, damned lies and statistics. "
Tesco often tell Marco to BOGOF! :D
:eyebrows: :eyebrows:
Marco.
BOGOF : "Buy One, Get One Free".
Mine's snappier but I aint spelling it out:eyebrows:
How could anyone (who watches TV regularly) forget this annoying wanker:
NAqplkORhII
Marco.
The Black Adder
11-10-2015, 15:23
gosh yes... I remember that ad... It still makes me cringe.. An that bloke with the round red glasses too, was he in Coronation Street or something?... all together, very creepy.
Ammonite Audio
11-10-2015, 15:42
How could anyone (who watches TV regularly) forget this annoying wanker:
NAqplkORhII
Marco.
Well, the advertising clearly worked in this instance!
Indeed, Anthony... As a matter of interest, as you've chosen to fit DACT stepped attenuators, which utilise SMD resistors, in your (£5k?) Soul Mate preamps [and have done for some time], what's your view on their inherent sonic qualities and/or technical suitability for that job, in terms of them maximising signal integrity?
Can I just point out that I have not said there is anything inherently good or bad about surface mount as opposed to leaded resistors sonically. I am sure a good SMD component will sound better than a poor leaded one and vice versa. What I was arguing again was:
1. Just because they are small and you can pack many more into the same space as one 5W resistor, doesn’t mean the signal is somehow fooled into thinking its a single resistor
2. I would be very surprised if 20 1k resistors in series sounded as good as one equal 20k resistor.
3. If a manufacturer happens to make a change that is simpler for them and lower cost, be wary when then then claim the change was done for reasons of the sound.
4. There are probably no absolutes in audio
I agree with all four points, Nick! No worries on that score, mate :)
I was just curious what Anthony thought on the subject, primarily because he uses SMD-based switches in his amplifier designs (so obviously rates them, as he could've easily fitted devices that used conventional resistors on his amps), so I was curious as to his reasons for choosing DACT, especially, as you know yourself, that he is a stickler for perfection/quality.
There's simply no way he'd have fitted those switches to his equipment if he didn't think that they were the best option for the job. He also recommended the DACT for me to use in the Croft, which again was spot on as it sounds great, as indeed do the Goldpoint switches, employing the same resistor technology, which I'm using now in my passive.
Therefore, the fact that SMDs are obviously more than capable of high-quality performance is undeniable. It's what I've heard with the DACT, and indeed is what I'm hearing now with the Goldpoint, so as you correctly say, there are no absolutes in audio. Also, if you do some research on DACT and Goldpoint stepped attenuators/passives it's difficult to find a negative word about them - indeed quite the opposite!
You don't gain that type of worldwide reputation if your products are crap... So, let your ears ultimately be the judge, not your rather ignorant and ill-informed biases [and incidentally, that comment was NOT aimed at you]. It's amazing how folk who dismiss things they've likely never even heard, still feel entitled to offer authoritative views on the matter ;)
Marco.
P.S You have a PM.
Well, the advertising clearly worked in this instance!
Lol, yeah... Trouble is, you remember him, but not necessarily the company he was advertising!
Marco.
A half metre length of MC5000 'sounds better than' a 1m set. Now I am worried if a half metre added on to an already good short cable used in the tens of metres professionally makes such a difference.. Sorry, I'm really not having a go, but I'm rather glad I'm no longer listening to 'sound' at this level (been there and done it - in my day it was turning LP12 Valhalla kit fuses round, mains plug fuses too and hearing a difference, this apart from turning drive belts upside down and inside out and comparing an LP12 mat both sides up).
All I want to do here is offer a word of caution, as sometimes, 'we' can get so far up our backsides with these sort of things that, in the wider world, actually make beggar all differences. I mean, that Croft line stage must be pretty damned awful and unlistenable by now, judging by the large improvements brought by changing two resistors in a quality passive preamp. I'm sure the Croft isn't in the slightest bit awful and never was, but you get where I'm coming from here? Have fun by all means, but please don't take it to the level of slagging off 'ordinary' 1% metal film resistors as 'awful' or 'terrible' as used in practically all audio and studio gear nowadays :)
I'm looking to get a stepped attenuator for my NVA P50. Yep, the path has been trodden and there's the obvious one I could and probably should use. I have to say that the one recommended by Anthony here (the Polish? one in square red enclosures) with foil resistors does look bloody tempting...
Hi Dave,
A half metre length of MC5000 'sounds better than' a 1m set.
I'm talking about in terms of the effect it has on a passive preamp, certainly here in my system. The Croft (being an active design) doesn't really care whether it's fitted with 0.5m or 1m interconnects, but the Goldpoint seems rather more sensitive to cable lengths, so I'm only reporting what I'm hearing. The Tisbury was the same.
All I want to do here is offer a word of caution, as sometimes, 'we' can get so far up our backsides with these sort of things that, in the wider world, actually make beggar all differences. I mean, that Croft line stage must be pretty damned awful and unlistenable by now, judging by the large improvements brought by changing two resistors in a quality passive preamp.
Not sure what you're on about there. The Croft line stage still sounds superb, as it always has done, but the Goldpoint is doing the 'passive disappearing act' thing, as well as retaining all the energy and dynamics of the sound I get with the Croft, hence why it's such an addictive listen! :)
You're missing the point about why the Goldpoint sounds *so* much better now than it did when I first got it. It's not just because I've upgraded two resistors, but more importantly, because now that the switches have been shunted, I've done away with 30-odd series resistors that were originally sitting in the signal path...
Now there is only ONE [on each channel] - and top-notch ones, too. *That*, more than anything else, is why the Goldpoint sounds so good now! :exactly:
I'm sure the Croft isn't in the slightest bit awful and never was, but you get where I'm coming from here?
Kind of, but not really, because you're missing the point, as I've just explained above.
Have fun by all means, but please don't take it to the level of slagging off 'ordinary' 1% metal film resistors as 'awful' or 'terrible' as used in practically all audio and studio gear nowadays
I'm not slagging off anything, but the fact is that 'ordinary' 1% metal-film resistors do not sound anywhere near as good as the best 'boutique/audiophile' types, or rather I should say that the latter do less damage to the signal (so are 'less bad'), as that's the correct way to look at it.
If you were there when we did the resistor comparisons at Duncan's place, you'd agree. The difference between the Z-foils (or even the much cheaper Caddocks), compared with ordinary metal-films, really is significant - so much so, in fact, that I intend to upgrade all the resistors in the phono stage of my Croft to Z-Foils.
There are actually some in there already, so Glenn must also rate them, and had put them in when he was originally upgrading my preamp! Great minds, lol....
I'm looking to get a stepped attenuator for my NVA P50. Yep, the path has been trodden and there's the obvious one I could and probably should use. I have to say that the one recommended by Anthony here (the Polish? one in square red enclosures) with foil resistors does look bloody tempting...
Nice one. The Khosmo is a lovely unit, but then so is the DACT and Goldpoint - all are top-notch stepped attenuators, so you pays your money and takes your choice. I haven't compared the Khosmo with the DACT, but Anthony has, so he could advise you on that.
At the end of the day, it's important that you have the gumption and confidence to trust your own ears, and make your own decisions about what direction to take your system, instead of relying on an 'appointed guru' to do all your thinking for you. Only brainless sheep do that, because otherwise they wouldn't know where to start themselves!! ;)
Marco.
I don't follow an appointed anybody, but I do respect people who 'feel' music similarly to myself ya know :lol: In the preamp I've made, the Glasshouse is obviously fine, but the other one I mentioned does look very neat :)
As an aside, I'd love to know 'why' going from 1/5m to 1m on the MC5000 makes a difference at all. Silly question, but have both cables had plenty of use (you know where I'm coming from with giving freshly made MC5000 and AC110 some hours of use before judging them). Anyway, I'm diverting without meaning to, it's just that from such a distance, I'm genuinely trying to put some sort of focus or meaning to this, that's all...
I know YOU don't follow anyone. I was referring to something else, and I think you know what/who I mean! ;)
The cable thing is easy... I thought it was an established fact that passives prefer the shortest cable lengths possible? They have difficulty 'driving' longer cable lengths, compared with active designs. That's certainly been my experience, and there are technical explanations for it. From earlier:
Agreed about cables, which is why I use nothing longer than 0.5m interconnects, with the Goldpoint - and high quality, low-capacitance (minimum loss, low attenuation) ones at that.
Yes, resistive passives will be very sensitive to capacitance on the output side.
That pretty much nails it.
Now, whilst the Goldpoint (or the Tisbury before it) certainly don't sound 'broken', with a 1m pair of interconnects attached to them, I can still hear a detrimental sonic effect, compared with when cables half that length are used instead - and enough to always make me want to use that length.
With respect, you have the tendency to cast doubt [albeit in a polite/pseudo-apologetic way] over what others can genuinely hear with certain things, simply because you're unable to do so yourself (subtly inferring that it's imagined), and whilst you're entitled to your opinion, that aspect of how you put things across is rather patronising.
Trouble is, I think it's just your style and you can't help it! :doh:
Marco.
I'm interested, not patronising from a fixed viewpoint :) My workroom system has a half metre TIS from DAC to switcher (passive pre with Tisbury-style attenuators feeding via MC5000 to a Crown D-60 for headphone duties, which still sounds good into speakers too imo, but I digress), this then has a 1m SSC to my NVA P50 preamp (damaged AP20 box, but it's a P50 inside) and then 1m SSC to NVA power amps, 1m Ecoflex 10 to the Krell and 1m Klotz 110 to the HH. I can't really shorten any of these and the length doesn't seem to affect the little 47k film pot in the P50, but obviously, if I go for a high quality attenuator for best channel matching at 'very' low levels, I wouldn't want the expense to be largely wasted by not using the right exit cables.
The SSC cables offer around 45pF/m I guess, the AC110 around 70pF and the Ecoflex cable is around 70pF/m -
http://www.nevadaradio.co.uk/cables-leads-plugs/antenna-cable/ssb-electronic-ecoflex-10
https://www.diodecomms.co.uk/index.php?id_product=40&controller=product
So I'm not trying to be condescending, but I AM genuinely interested on others' findings here, as it will apply to me :)
Ok, I accept that.
However, the thing is, we use totally different equipment/cables (and I suspect have slightly different views on what sounds good), so I don't see how extrapolating what I've done in my system, to yours, is likely to allow you any special kind of insight into what is and what isn't the right way of going about things?
Just use your own system and your own ears to judge things, and forget about what I've done, would be my advice :)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
11-10-2015, 20:24
Ok, I accept that.
However, the thing is, we use totally different equipment/cables (and I suspect have slightly different views on what sounds good), so I don't see how extrapolating what I've done in my system, to yours, is likely to allow you any special kind of insight into what is and what isn't the right way of doing things?
Just use your own system and your own ears to judge things, and forget about what I've done, would be my advice :)
Marco.
But can't we learn from other people's experiences? It may not work all the time, but worth trying to understand, surely?
orbscure
11-10-2015, 20:31
But can't we learn from other people's experiences? It may not work all the time, but worth trying to understand, surely?
Spot on Richard! Much, if not all, of my audio experimentation has been influenced by this and other hi-fi forums... and several pieces of kit I've owned and currently use is as a direct result of these discussions too...
But can't we learn from other people's experiences? It may not work all the time, but worth trying to understand, surely?
Yes, for sure, but I get the feeling that Dave's attempting to obtain some sort of 'definitive' answer on this, by following what I've done, and that's simply not going to happen. You can get some clues, but ultimately he must judge things for himself in his own system.
Just because in my system, to my ears, I can hear the detrimental sonic effect of using 1m length interconnects, with the Goldpoint (compared with 0.5m ones) doesn't mean that he will too, with his NVA cables and equipment, which may react in a different way. There is no real correlation here - and that's my point.
Marco.
Spot on Richard! Much, if not all, of my audio experimentation has been influenced by this and other hi-fi forums... and several pieces of kit I've owned and currently use is as a direct result of these discussions too...
You see, that's where we're different. Whilst I've definitely learned from others here (on various matters) and will continue to do so, I tend to just go off and do things on my own accord and then report the results I get. I prefer learning mostly from my own experiences, even if that means sometimes getting it wrong.
What is it they say again about the man who never makes any mistakes? ;)
The trick is to LEARN from them, and crucially, use that learning curve to your advantage in future. That's how I've ended up with the type of system I have!
Marco.
Unfortunately, more nonsense from the uninitiated 'elsewhere' I'm afraid I have to deal with:
There is a very good reason for that and that is your interconnect is not suitable for a passive, if you hear that much difference between 1m and 50cm then the capacitance of the cable is too high for the interface you are using it with.
Read the spec here: http://shop.klotz-ais.com/quickorder/artikelpdf/MC5000__d.pdf
The MC-5000s are already very low-capacitance cables, at 55 pF/m, so it's got feck all to do with that. As usual, you shoot your big mouth off without properly assessing the facts of the matter!
The reason why I can hear the difference is quite simple: passive preamps by their very nature prefer the shortest cable lengths possible, and in a revealing system you can hear the results when things in that respect are sub-optimal, i.e. less than perfect. I'm not saying 'broken', just not as good as they could be.
In order to prove the point, if you think that your cables are any better, let's ask someone here who uses SSCs to loan me a pair, and if they sound better (to my ears) with the Goldpoint, than is achieved with the MC5000s, then I'll report it here, fairly and squarely! If not, I'll report that, too. Unlike you (as I have a life), I'm not interested in furthering some pointless 'war'; merely on potentially improving my hi-fi system.
So if there are any SSC users up for that test, PM me, and we'll sort out the details :cool:
Marco.
Once again taken in by bullshit because you don't have the knowledge to tell any different. Specifications need to be qualified to make any sense what were the parameters, how were they measured. I can tell you just by looking at a picture of the construction with the pos and neg so close to each other with a cheap PVC dielectric that figure CANNOT be correct. But this is usual in the cable trade I am afraid. The latest thing is low cap so they all say they are low cap as they know they will get away with it.
Lol... You're so full of shit, it's unreal! So a professional cable, such as Klotz MC5000, used in 1000s of studios throughout the world, has specs published which, according to you, are marketing guff? Jeez, your blinkered idiocy knows no bounds! :D
If it were 'foo' audiophile cables we were discussing, then you might have a point. However, cables used in professional environments, aren't subject to fads or 'latest things': they do *exactly* what they say on the tin, otherwise the companies producing them would not only get into big trouble, but the cables wouldn't sell, because professional users buy them on their specs!
Anyway, I won't entertain any more of your bullshit, even though it's fun making a mockery of your ridiculously ill-informed absolutist statements. Let's cut to the proof of the pudding. Anyone with a spare pair of SSCs, let me know, and I'll test them against the MC5000s (and their 'made up' low-capacitance :lol:), for use on the Goldpoint. Then, we'll soon find out the truth of the matter... ;)
Marco.
Checking that spec, the conductor to conductor capacitance is 55pf/M, and the conductor to screen is 90pf/M. If its wired so the screen and one of the conductors is ground, then the total capacitance will be 145pf/M. If a passive was made around a 100k attenuator (for example), the total resistance to ground and so the source impedance will be something like 50k, So that, driving into 1M of 145pf/M cable would have a -3dB point of 22kHz, I would expect that to be heard as the roll off will be into the audible range, 0.5M of the same cable will double that frequency so 44kHz, far less likely to be heard. At the other end. If Marco's pre has a 20k shunt, then lets guess a driving resistance of 15kHz. And lets assume the cable was wired with both conductors signal, and screen to ground, so the capacitance was 90pf/M, then the -3dB point would be 118kHz, unlikely to hear that.
So my point is that cable could, depending on the passive and the way the cable was used, have a audible difference or not between 0.5 and 1M lengths.
I agree, that the numbers don’t give the whole story in many cases, but often they do.
I kind of follow where you're coming from Nick, and certainly agree that the numbers don't tell the whole story.
I was simply responding to the idiocy of someone who, in no uncertain terms, was TELLING me that the cables I had were too high a capacitance for use with my passive preamp, when the idiot in question clearly had no idea what the capacitance measurements were for the cables I was using!! With complete ignorance, he just blurts out any old shit to further his stupid agenda :doh:
Anyway, all I indisputably *know*, because I trust my ears, is that I can clearly hear (although it's far from disastrous) the deleterious sonic effect of moving from using 0.5m interconnects, to 1m ones, with the Goldpoint - and I suspect that's got far more to do with passives, in general, by their very nature, preferring the shortest lengths of cable possible, than anything relating to the 'bodged' capacitance value of the Klotz cables I'm using.
However, I'm more than up for being proven wrong on that one, as at the end of the day I'm far more interested in ensuring that my system sounds as good as it possibly can, than winning an argument on a forum! ;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
11-10-2015, 23:06
I was simply responding to the idiocy of someone who, in no uncertain terms, was TELLING me that the cables I had were too high a capacitance for use with my passive preamp, when the idiot in question clearly had no idea what the capacitance measurements were for the cables I was using!! With complete ignorance, he just blurts out any old shit :doh:
Why even mention the party concerned?
I wouldn't, as they see it as validation for being as objectionable on the internet as they are.
It's been 35 years since the Linn/Naim thing left them in the dirt, and still the bellyaching goes on....:doh:
awkwardbydesign
11-10-2015, 23:10
Yes, for sure, but I get the feeling that Dave's attempting to obtain some sort of 'definitive' answer on this, by following what I've done, and that's simply not going to happen. You can get some clues, but ultimately he must judge things for himself in his own system.
Just because in my system, to my ears, I can hear the detrimental sonic effect of using 1m length interconnects, with the Goldpoint (compared with 0.5m ones) doesn't mean that he will too, with his NVA cables and equipment, which may react in a different way. There is no real correlation here - and that's my point.
Marco.
Don't forget, we are all trying to make sense of what we hear, and why, in different ways. Those with a scientific or technical bent will try to use that system to understand and rationalise what you describe. Others will just try things without a technical rationale, but we all speak different languages. I sit somewhere in between, but any description will be a pale imitation of the actual experience. Religion*, philosophy and science are just different ways of trying to make sense of the universe, and none of them come very close.
If we can all make allowances for this we can all gain. And I do include myself, as I am as prone to frustration as anyone.
* Perhaps I should say spirituality, as religions tend to become a means of control.
Why even mention the party concerned?
I wouldn't, as they see it as validation for being as objectionable on the internet as they are.
It's been 35 years since the Linn/Naim thing left them in the dirt, and still the bellyaching goes on....:doh:
Lol - I know! I also know that I shouldn't mention the party concerned. Most of the time that's what happens, and I simply allow said party to wallow in his blinkered stupidity, but sometimes when said party is talking such utter unadulterated cack about something that you're doing with your system, you just can't help wanting to steam in and introduce a soupçon of reality! ;)
Anyway, I promise I'll be a good boy during this thread from now on and leave the malcontented old tit (who suffers from chronic Metaphysical Solipsism) to his own devices :thumbsup:
Marco.
Don't forget, we are all trying to make sense of what we hear, and why, in different ways. Those with a scientific or technical bent will try to use that system to understand and rationalise what you describe. Others will just try things without a technical rationale, but we all speak different languages. I sit somewhere in between, but any description will be a pale imitation of the actual experience. Religion*, philosophy and science are just different ways of trying to make sense of the universe, and none of them come very close.
If we can all make allowances for this we can all gain. And I do include myself, as I am as prone to frustration as anyone.
* Perhaps I should say spirituality, as religions tend to become a means of control.
We're getting rather deep now, Richard, but I do share your sentiments :)
Marco.
Anyway, in terms of a super-low capacitance cable, what about this stuff from Belden: http://www.canford.co.uk/Products/60-1800F_BELDEN-1800F-CABLE-Black
Capacitance: 39pF/m core to core, 85pF/m core to core+screen
Or the Low-Cap version of this Van Damme: http://www.vdctrading.com/content/VanDamme-Cable-Specifications/VanDamme-Silverseries.pdf
Both of those those seem pretty low-cap, Nick? Or if you (or anyone else) knows of a lower capacitance cable, then let's have some relevant links. I can see another 'AoS special' being born from this: the best SPPV cable for use with a passive preamp... Bring it on! ;)
Marco.
P.S I will get some of the Belden (above), fit some MS Audio plugs to it, and try it against the Klotz, using the Goldpoint passive as a reference, and see what happens. I've also got some SSCs winging their way to me, so we'll see if those are as good with passives, as balloon-boy, A.K.A. 'Old Helium Head' says!
Religion*, philosophy and science are just different ways of trying to make sense of the universe, and none of them come very close.
I think science comes closer than the other two (though of course it began as a branch of philosophy). I'm not sure what, if anything, religion brings to the party.
Ali Tait
12-10-2015, 07:14
Cool frocks?
Cool frocks?
Fair enough, though I'm not sure how they enable us to make sense of the universe.
I kind of follow where you're coming from Nick, and certainly agree that the numbers don't tell the whole story.
I was simply responding to the idiocy of someone who, in no uncertain terms, was TELLING me that the cables I had were too high a capacitance for use with my passive preamp, when the idiot in question clearly had no idea what the capacitance measurements were for the cables I was using!! With complete ignorance, he just blurts out any old shit to further his stupid agenda :doh:
Anyway, all I indisputably *know*, because I trust my ears, is that I can clearly hear (although it's far from disastrous) the deleterious sonic effect of moving from using 0.5m interconnects, to 1m ones, with the Goldpoint - and I suspect that's got far more to do with passives, in general, by their very nature, preferring the shortest lengths of cable possible, than anything relating to the 'bodged' capacitance value of the Klotz cables I'm using.
However, I'm more than up for being proven wrong on that one, as at the end of the day I'm far more interested in ensuring that my system sounds as good as it possibly can, than winning an argument on a forum! ;)
Marco.
All I am saying is that that cable could be a problem with a high value passive. Yours is low value, so less likely. A high value passive should be inside the amp its feeding, so cable length doesn't matter. But a low value passive will place more demands on the source. Its all down to showing that there is often engineering behind what gets called synergy.
If you are driving long cables, a resistive passive is a bad choice. if not, not.
All I am saying is that that cable could be a problem with a high value passive. Yours is low value, so less likely. A high value passive should be inside the amp its feeding, so cable length doesn't matter. But a low value passive will place more demands on the source. Its all down to showing that there is often engineering behind what gets called synergy.
If you are driving long cables, a resistive passive is a bad choice. if not, not.
In reference to the bit in bold, less likely, but still possible? The fact of the matter is I can clearly hear the difference between half metre and one metre cables, when used with both the Goldpoint and Tisbury passives I've tried.
Don't get me wrong, we're not talking massive treble roll-off and the whole sound falling apart - far from it - just the music not *quite* being as purposeful and involving as it should be. The effect, although low-level, is definitely there, and enough for me to want to use the shortest cable lengths, as I like things to be as optimised as possible.
So, two things:
1) What's the difference between a "high-value" passive and a "resistive" one? What is meant by "high value"?
2) Have a look at the spec and construction of the Belden cable I linked to earlier, and give me your opinion if you think it's liable to be lower capacitance than the Klotz MC5000s I'm currently using, the spec of which you've already seen.
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 08:45
I think science comes closer than the other two (though of course it began as a branch of philosophy). I'm not sure what, if anything, religion brings to the party.
I think that makes my point for me!
And I used to look in the window of an ecclesiastical supply shop in Victoria many years ago. Lovely fabrics! And I still use some of their incense.
Ok, well a couple of things:
1. The input capacitance of the amp will also have to be added, but of course that will be constant with cable length, but the combination may push the -3dB point where its audible. Without knowing what is at the front of your amp I could only guess at what the capacitance of that is.
2. "What's the difference between a "high-value" passive and a "resistive" one? What is meant by "high value"?" High value as in the -3dB point becomes audible. F-3 = 1 / ( 2 * Pi * R * C ), where R is in ohms, and C in Farads. My point about the "resistive" is not a high low thing. A inductive preamp such as a AVC or TVC behaves differently, at the worst (highest volume) the output impedance is the same as the source impedance. With a resistive, the source doesn't matter so much, its the value of the passive that sets the resistance.
3. 39 and 85 is less than 55 and 95, so, yep its a bit less.
4. I do have a hourly rate :-)
anthonyTD
12-10-2015, 09:06
My own personal reasons for using Switched attenuators were founded a long time ago,the main one being Accuracy,over conventional pots etc, Therefore i needed a good Switched attenuator that not only performed well sonically, but was reliable, and would fit into the space i had available, i also knew the switch type that DACT use as i had used versions of it too in earlier products, those were the initial reasons for choosing the DACT type, however, i also believe that the small footprint of the components lessen the problems that can be associated with larger, conventional resistive elements, ie; contact areas of the resistor material to connection ends, and the affect vibration has on each type etc. As for one type being sonicaly better over the other, well, that is always going to be subjective, as Marco has found by replacing certain material types in his experiment, however, in my opinion, the positives of switched attenuators on the whole, made from either surface mount, or conventional resistive elements[what ever the material] compared to conventional pots are always apparent to me.
Can I just point out that I have not said there is anything inherently good or bad about surface mount as opposed to leaded resistors sonically. I am sure a good SMD component will sound better than a poor leaded one and vice versa. What I was arguing again was:
1. Just because they are small and you can pack many more into the same space as one 5W resistor, doesn’t mean the signal is somehow fooled into thinking its a single resistor
2. I would be very surprised if 20 1k resistors in series sounded as good as one equal 20k resistor.
3. If a manufacturer happens to make a change that is simpler for them and lower cost, be wary when then then claim the change was done for reasons of the sound.
4. There are probably no absolutes in audio
anthonyTD
12-10-2015, 09:34
While we are on the subject,
As Nick has stated, depending on the impedance, or resistive value used in the attenuator, in conjunction with the input impedance, and capacitance of the amplifier used, it is posible to perceive a diffrence in sonics between a 1 mtr, and a half mtr interconnect, as Marco has found. Passive preamps, what ever the type, conventional, or switched will always be much more susceptable to cable length,and type in comparison to a preamp where the attenuator is actively driven.
I am now using a supposedly low cap low res nordost flat cabke between tvc and amp. Have to say it did make a difference although whether it was the capacitance or not i wouldnt know...they were kindly supplied by Carjay and although a bit awkwarx to use as they are springy they are a metre long. I will when i change things round try a half metre set to see if i hear any differences. I should have some of the same cable somewhere.
Ali Tait
12-10-2015, 10:09
Fair enough, though I'm not sure how they enable us to make sense of the universe.
Might as well be comfortable whilst trying to..
The Black Adder
12-10-2015, 13:00
Marco... What are you doing about the phase invert using the passive? The Croft (as it's being used as a phono stage) outputs are inverted yet the Pi outputs aren't.
Just wondered. :)
Ok, well a couple of things:
1. The input capacitance of the amp will also have to be added, but of course that will be constant with cable length, but the combination may push the -3dB point where its audible. Without knowing what is at the front of your amp I could only guess at what the capacitance of that is.
2. "What's the difference between a "high-value" passive and a "resistive" one? What is meant by "high value"?" High value as in the -3dB point becomes audible. F-3 = 1 / ( 2 * Pi * R * C ), where R is in ohms, and C in Farads. My point about the "resistive" is not a high low thing. A inductive preamp such as a AVC or TVC behaves differently, at the worst (highest volume) the output impedance is the same as the source impedance. With a resistive, the source doesn't matter so much, its the value of the passive that sets the resistance.
3. 39 and 85 is less than 55 and 95, so, yep its a bit less.
4. I do have a hourly rate :-)
Ok, got all that. Cheers! Please forward the invoice for your services to my secretary, Grant. He's the one sat [over there] in the grey pencil skirt and stilettos, twiddling his hair :eyebrows:
Marco.
Ok, got all that. Cheers! Please forward the invoice for your services to my secretary, Grant. He's the one sat [over there] in the grey pencil skirt and stilettos, twiddling his hair :eyebrows:
Marco.
Had to stop wearing wool:eek:
Hi Anthony,
My own personal reasons for using Switched attenuators were founded a long time ago,the main one being Accuracy,over conventional pots etc, Therefore i needed a good Switched attenuator that not only performed well sonically, but was reliable, and would fit into the space i had available, i also knew the switch type that DACT use as i had used versions of it too in earlier products, those were the initial reasons for choosing the DACT type, however, i also believe that the small footprint of the components lessen the problems that can be associated with larger, conventional resistive elements, ie; contact areas of the resistor material to connection ends, and the affect vibration has on each type etc. As for one type being sonicaly better over the other, well, that is always going to be subjective, as Marco has found by replacing certain material types in his experiment, however, in my opinion, the positives of switched attenuators on the whole, made from either surface mount, or conventional resistive elements[what ever the material] compared to conventional pots are always apparent to me.
Interesting, and thanks for that. I knew you had very good reasons for choosing DACT attenuators, and so obviously considered that the SMD-type resistors they were fitted with didn't act as a significant bottleneck, which are also my findings :)
The bit in bold is a valid point, and something I hadn't considered... That's interesting. So not only do SMD-type resistors have shorter signal paths than conventional resistors, but they could also be less susceptible to vibration? Just shows you that blinkered absolutist thinking in audio doesn't get you very far! ;)
What's patently obvious, through listening, is that both DACT and Goldpoint switched attenuators are up there with the best, but like anything else, are built to a price, and as such, can be improved upon. You need to try some of these Z-Foil resistors, as they really are superb and almost as musically effective as the Obbligato Teflon tinfoil coupling caps you fitted to the Croft! :eek:
Marco.
As Nick has stated, depending on the impedance, or resistive value used in the attenuator, in conjunction with the input impedance, and capacitance of the amplifier used, it is posible to perceive a diffrence in sonics between a 1 mtr, and a half mtr interconnect, as Marco has found. Passive preamps, what ever the type, conventional, or switched will always be much more susceptable to cable length,and type in comparison to a preamp where the attenuator is actively driven.
Indeed. We all know that passive preamps are much more sensitive to load, cable lengths and type. However, as I have found, they can be made to work very well when you partner them optimally! :cool:
Marco.
I believe the main issue with smd could possibly be in the quality of machine-soldering? Repairing an smd populated board is also tricky without the skills, tools and experience needed.
Me? I've been a pauper-coward and ordered a ladder type Dale attenuator to see what that does. Constant impedance on every step, the resistors have a good rep for basic types I think and if it's load of rubbish, I can say I've tried!
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 16:19
I believe the main issue with smd could possibly be in the quality of machine-soldering? Repairing an smd populated board is also tricky without the skills, tools and experience needed.
Me? I've been a pauper-coward and ordered a ladder type Dale attenuator to see what that does. Constant impedance on every step, the resistors have a good rep for basic types I think and if it's load of rubbish, I can say I've tried!
Good man. Then you can waste your life swapping resistors. :lol:
Hi Jo,
Marco... What are you doing about the phase invert using the passive? The Croft (as it's being used as a phono stage) outputs are inverted yet the Pi outputs aren't.
Just wondered.
When the Croft is being used as a phono-stage only, through the Goldpoint, then I leave things as normal, as the latter does not phase invert the signal. If I'm using the Pi, through the Croft (not the Goldpoint), then I would reverse the polarity of the speaker cables on the Copper amp, as the Pi doesn't phase invert, but the Croft does.
And if I'm using the Pi, through the Goldpoint (without the Croft), I leave things as normal, as neither of those items phase invert the signal. Essentially, in any scenario where the Croft is the last thing that the signal 'sees', before going to the power amp, you would reverse the polarity of the speaker cables. In all other instances, you would leave things as normal.
Hope that makes sense :)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 16:21
Marco... What are you doing about the phase invert using the passive? The Croft (as it's being used as a phono stage) outputs are inverted yet the Pi outputs aren't.
Just wondered. :)
Oh Lord, please don't go there! At least not until we've flogged this subject to death.
Are we nearly there yet, mum?
I believe the main issue with smd could possibly be in the quality of machine-soldering? Repairing an smd populated board is also tricky without the skills, tools and experience needed.
Sure, but none of that automatically makes them crap! ;) The quality of the soldering on the Goldpoint Nichrome SMDs, observed under a microscope, appears to be first class.
Me? I've been a pauper-coward and ordered a ladder type Dale attenuator to see what that does. Constant impedance on every step, the resistors have a good rep for basic types I think and if it's load of rubbish, I can say I've tried!
Ladders, done well, are arguably the best. Good luck - hope it delivers a significant sonic upgrade for you :)
Marco.
Are we nearly there yet, mum?
Almost. We just need to find a cure for Metaphysical Solipsism, which obviously is rife in certain parts... ;)
Marco.
The Black Adder
12-10-2015, 16:49
Hi Jo,
When the Croft is being used as a phono-stage only, through the Goldpoint, then I leave things as normal, as the latter does not phase invert the signal. If I'm using the Pi, through the Croft (not the Goldpoint), then I would reverse the polarity of the speaker cables on the Copper amp, as the Pi doesn't phase invert, but the Croft does.
And if I'm using the Pi, through the Goldpoint (without the Croft), I leave things as normal, as neither of those items phase invert the signal. Essentially, in any scenario where the Croft is the last thing that the signal 'sees', before going to the power amp, you would reverse the polarity of the speaker cables. In all other instances, you would leave things as normal.
Hope that makes sense :)
Marco.
I kind of see... lol - righto, but if you are using the Croft (as a phono stage) through the Goldpoint then it will still need the speaker cables inverting at the power amp surely because the Croft is inverting and the phase isn't being corrected in the Goldpoint (or does it?).
If you are using the pi through the Goldpoint and don't invert the cables on the power amp (after listening to some vinyl) then it wouldn't sound right....
lol... anyways, carry on chaps... ignore me.
but if you are using the Croft (as a phono stage) through the Goldpoint then it will still need the speaker cables inverting at the power amp surely because the Croft is inverting and the phase isn't being corrected in the Goldpoint (or does it?).
To my ears, it sounds best there left as normal. Inverting the speaker cables, in that scenario, makes it sound worse.
Marco.
My own personal reasons for using Switched attenuators were founded a long time ago,the main one being Accuracy,over conventional pots etc, Therefore i needed a good Switched attenuator that not only performed well sonically, but was reliable, and would fit into the space i had available, i also knew the switch type that DACT use as i had used versions of it too in earlier products, those were the initial reasons for choosing the DACT type, however, i also believe that the small footprint of the components lessen the problems that can be associated with larger, conventional resistive elements, ie; contact areas of the resistor material to connection ends, and the affect vibration has on each type etc. As for one type being sonicaly better over the other, well, that is always going to be subjective, as Marco has found by replacing certain material types in his experiment, however, in my opinion, the positives of switched attenuators on the whole, made from either surface mount, or conventional resistive elements[what ever the material] compared to conventional pots are always apparent to me.
I would love to see evidence of changes in sound due to vibration in resistors in domestic or professional audio applications, got any?
FYI: In the aerospace industry component performance under severe vibration is a apparently a critical performance test, NASA apparently recommend that resistors (the metal element) are connected into circuit with a flexible intermediate conductor IE a thin wire....presumably because the wire acts like a vibration absorber of some sort increasing the reliability of the part....I can't imaging anything in audio that would be comparable....
I would love to see evidence of changes in sound due to vibration in resistors in domestic or professional audio applications, got any?
Well, Clarity Cap, for example, consider that the phenomenon is relevant in capacitors [so why not also resistors?], and have conducted extensive research into the matter: http://www.claritycap.co.uk/products/mr.php
Look, therez coloured graffs there and everyfink! :eyebrows: ;)
The Black Adder
12-10-2015, 18:48
To my ears, it sounds best there left as normal. Inverting the speaker cables, in that scenario, makes it sound worse.
Marco.
Ok... Now I'm confused, but there are far more things to get confused over so I'll go and find something random, like how many bytes are in a kilobyte... it's not 1024 bytes any more... apparently, oh no... it's now 1000 bytes??... so I'll leave it there... lol
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 18:56
Almost. We just need to find a cure for Metaphysical Solipsism, which obviously is rife in certain parts... ;)
Marco.
Or understand what it means, in my case!
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 19:03
Ok... Now I'm confused, but there are far more things to get confused over so I'll go and find something random, like how many bytes are in a kilobyte... it's not 1024 bytes any more... apparently, oh no... it's now 1000 bytes??... so I'll leave it there... lol
Apple bytes are smaller, so you need more.
Or understand what it means, in my case!
Wiki is your friend: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_solipsism
Remind you of anyone? ;)
Marco.
Well, Clarity Cap, for example, consider that the phenomenon is relevant in capacitors [so why not also resistors?], and have conducted extensive research into the matter: http://www.claritycap.co.uk/products/mr.php
Look, therez coloured graffs there and everyfink! :eyebrows: ;)
Sorry, it's meaningless, where is the detail of their extensive research, a capacitor is not a resistor ...so my original question about resistors still remains.
http://www.hificollective.co.uk/sites/default/files/claritycapmr_whitepaper.pdf
Sorry, it's meaningless, where is the detail of their extensive research, a capacitor is not a resistor ...so my original question about resistors still remains.
My post was tongue-in-cheek, Neal. That should've been obvious. However, in terms of capacitors, see Grant's link to the white paper.
Marco.
Strange I had to go elsewhere to find this research: http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/download/ClarityCap_Technical_Report.pdf
It refers to internal vibration caused by a signal passing though the capacitor NOT external influences but this is just a diversion, it's not a resistor.
Edit: Ah Grant beat me to it.
Ok... Now I'm confused, but there are far more things to get confused over so I'll go and find something random, like how many bytes are in a kilobyte... it's not 1024 bytes any more... apparently, oh no... it's now 1000 bytes??... so I'll leave it there... lol
1 kilobyte = 1000 byte
1 kibibyte = 1024 byte
It refers to internal vibration caused by a signal passing though the capacitor NOT external influences but this is just a diversion, it's not a resistor.
Lol - I know! My point was that, in audio, one should always look beyond the immediately obvious, and apply lateral thinking, which is precisely what Clarity Cap did with capacitors... Perhaps if someone applied that thinking to resistors, they'd also discover something useful that wasn't immediately obvious? ;)
Marco.
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 22:23
Wiki is your friend: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_solipsism
Remind you of anyone? ;)
Marco.
I had already googled it. But in my case I follow the Hindu/Buddhist view that the mind is an aspect of Maya, and as such needs to be ignored if one is to achieve enlightenment. It is simply the result of the soul being housed in a body and it's interaction with the world causes this ephemeral and annoying distraction. Of course, as we all interact individually each mind takes on a different personality, and this is what we mistakenly believe to be the real us.
OK? Any questions? :lol:
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 22:27
Strange I had to go elsewhere to find this research: http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/download/ClarityCap_Technical_Report.pdf
It refers to internal vibration caused by a signal passing though the capacitor NOT external influences but this is just a diversion, it's not a resistor.
Edit: Ah Grant beat me to it.
Blimey, I thought everyone had read that. I would have mentioned it myself if I'd realised.
walpurgis
12-10-2015, 22:27
I had already googled it. But in my case I follow the Hindu/Buddhist view that the mind is an aspect of Maya, and as such needs to be ignored if one is to achieve enlightenment. It is simply the result of the soul being housed in a body and it's interaction with the world causes this ephemeral and annoying distraction. Of course, as we all interact individually each mind takes on a different personality, and this is what we mistakenly believe to be the real us.
OK? Any questions? :lol:
Yes. What the hell are you on about? :scratch:
:D
(no, I don't want to be enlightened further)
awkwardbydesign
12-10-2015, 22:30
Yes. What the hell are you on about? :scratch:
:D
(no, I don't want to be enlightened further)
What do you mean, further? ;)
Please convey my thanks to Korton;)
The ClarityCap research makes it quite clear that they found no evidence that capacitors are affected by external vibration. What they did find was that capacitors resonated quite clearly when fed a signal and this potentially modulated their own output - so they weren't prone to external vibration but produced their own.
Ah, I see now that this has already been pointed out.
Wiki is your friend: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_solipsism
Remind you of anyone? ;)
Marco.
Me!
The ClarityCap research makes it quite clear that they found no evidence that capacitors are affected by external vibration. What they did find was that capacitors resonated quite clearly when fed a signal and this potentially modulated their own output - so they weren't prone to external vibration but produced their own.
Ah, I see now that this has already been pointed out.
Sure, but the point is, 'thinking outside of the box', as the experiments carried out at Clarity Cap proves, can often pay dividends :)
Now, what if someone were to apply such thinking to the 'behaviour' [in certain applications] of resistors, and undertook the required research? Might similar, hitherto undiscovered, information be revealed? And I'm not necessarily talking about the effects of vibration.
In my opinion, far too many folk think that, with audio, all there is to know is already known [essentially it's a 'done deal'], when I suspect the reality is quite the opposite. In my opinion, we need to consider that what we can currently measure, and thus 'prove', only amounts to scratching the surface of what probably exists.
A quote from Our Ethos: "I think many so-called "objectivists" oversimplify the processes involved in reproducing recorded music electrically (although many audio designers are perhaps guilty of over-complicating their designs at times). They ignore the fact that music signals themselves can be quite complex, certainly in conjunction with human perception of them."
I believe that's a valid observation, and something that should be considered.
Marco.
Me!
Yeah, but as a lazy sod, you're only a half-arsed solipsist! ;)
Marco.
anthonyTD
13-10-2015, 08:49
My Ramblings mentioning vibration concerned mainly the effect transportation has on electronic assemblies and components in general!
A...
awkwardbydesign
13-10-2015, 09:27
The ClarityCap research makes it quite clear that they found no evidence that capacitors are affected by external vibration. What they did find was that capacitors resonated quite clearly when fed a signal and this potentially modulated their own output - so they weren't prone to external vibration but produced their own.
Ah, I see now that this has already been pointed out.
And yet, there are condenser microphones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphone
And yet, there are condenser microphones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphone
And yes, there are carbon microphones, and strain gauges can have a lot in common with a resistor, but just because something could do something is not evidence that it does. If you have ever stepped on a microphone cable you will find some of them are monophonic as well. But its all a strawman, Anthony gave the reason for what he said. Of all the things in a valve amp (which is where he uses them) that could be microphonic I think a stepped attenuator is low down the list.
Of all the things in a valve amp (which is where he uses them) that could be microphonic I think a stepped attenuator is low down the list.
I agree, but Anthony doesn't use stepped attenuators in a valve amp, he uses them in his solid-state Soul Mate preamps: http://www.tubedistinctions.co.uk/soul_mate.htm
I use one in my Croft (a DACT), so perhaps that's where you're getting things mixed up?
Marco.
I had already googled it. But in my case I follow the Hindu/Buddhist view that the mind is an aspect of Maya, and as such needs to be ignored if one is to achieve enlightenment. It is simply the result of the soul being housed in a body and it's interaction with the world causes this ephemeral and annoying distraction. Of course, as we all interact individually each mind takes on a different personality, and this is what we mistakenly believe to be the real us.
OK? Any questions? :lol:
Spot on !
Loving the new avatar! :D :lol:
Marco.
P.S I'd put an 'r' after the 'F'... Makes it more relevant ;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.