does anyone out there have a block diagram or any idea of the circuit configuration in a fm acoustics linearizer...? regardless of model i suspect they are the same.. i would REALLY like to see how to achieve frequency manipulation without destroying frequency phase relations in an analog circuit... IF this is truly possible it would mean the end of cable swapping and such tweaks because i highly suspect this is what occurs in the whole cable "sound" phenomena... please any ideas or suggestion for such a circuit?
I painfully went through much of the ad copy on their website, where they carefully avoid saying what it actually does, but I'm pretty confident it's a parametric equalizer in disguise.
Where did it say 'frequency manipulation without destroying frequency phase relations in an analog circuit' - I may have missed that.
Jan
Where did it say 'frequency manipulation without destroying frequency phase relations in an analog circuit' - I may have missed that.
Jan
What I read here https://www.fmacoustics.com/products/phono-linearizers/fm-223/ sounds like it's an archival phono amplifier with a declicking feature (about which they reveal nothing but that it's analogue).
Download the pdf from this page https://www.fmacoustics.com/products/harmonic-linearizers/fm-133-fm-233/ and scroll to figure C for a block diagram. Although they deny it, it looks like it's essentially a graphic equalizer with only five bands.
thanks for the response and the link guys.. looking at the diagram i REALLY believe that it does what it says though... basically, I see a straight amp... then separate and careful selection of freq and bandwidth gain will actually result in a subtractive / additive process .. the active circuit does NOT contribute to the gain or reduction in the freq bands.. this is the actual reason why they would be interactive... wow.. i can see how this thing actually works... it's DEFINITELY not a typical para EQ.. i will experimentally sim that circuit and share the results.... THIS thing could actually be a literal gem...!
Where did it say 'frequency manipulation without destroying frequency phase relations in an analog circuit' - I may have missed that.
THOSE ARE MY OWN WORDS... but they suggest it when the say things like "CONSTANT PHASE additive / subtractive...." that, to my mind is the holy grail of frequency gain/ reduction manipulation.. it is the very reason that the promises of freq manipulation in the DIGITAL domain is so attractive -the promise to boost and cut WITHOUT mucking up everything else, such as changing the phase relations of the frequencies in a musical signal.. i will be back...thanks again fellas..
THOSE ARE MY OWN WORDS... but they suggest it when the say things like "CONSTANT PHASE additive / subtractive...." that, to my mind is the holy grail of frequency gain/ reduction manipulation.. it is the very reason that the promises of freq manipulation in the DIGITAL domain is so attractive -the promise to boost and cut WITHOUT mucking up everything else, such as changing the phase relations of the frequencies in a musical signal.. i will be back...thanks again fellas..
It's not at all obvious whether a linear-phase equalizer is better than a minimum-phase equalizer (such as an ordinary analogue equalizer). If whatever caused the frequency response aberration that needs to be equalized has minimum-phase behaviour, the phase shift of a minimum-phase equalizer actually corrects the overall phase response.
This sidechain correction in // with the main chain was all the rage in the 70-ies and 80-ies. But yeah, it will work. It may even sound good.
So go for it, if you have the money to spare.
Jan
That piece is chockful of suggestions - not factual data. How can you not see through that??
Jan
For my own education - and for those reading who dare not ask the question - how is running a filter as a side-chain, then subtracting it from the main line, any different than simply running the main line through a filter? What special property is inherent to that topology, that sets it above, say a passive circuit with 3 caps and 3 resistors?
I can read the marketing spiel (what a word-smith!) and perhaps become convinced, but not through something I'd understand in electrical engineering speak.
I can read the marketing spiel (what a word-smith!) and perhaps become convinced, but not through something I'd understand in electrical engineering speak.
again... i believe its the group phase response that makes it superior IF it actually achieves what they say it does... JUST IMAGING no phase difference no group delay if i'm saying it correctly... or at least minimal group delay... now back to the circuit...all we have to do is SUBSTITUTE the relevant Opamp Integrator values per Freq Band, and yes indeed the controls will be interactive.. i'm already working on it..
As drawn in post #14, you have a voltage follower, a rather complicated impedance network and another voltage follower. The second voltage follower ensures there will be no signal current flowing through the rather complicated impedance, so the signal voltage drop across it will be zero, so you might as well leave it out. When you do, you have a cascade of two voltage followers, which can be further simplified to just one voltage follower.