Hello Gertjan, (Sorry for the late reply).
Yes, I think so. At least that was my experience.
A few people have asked me about this in the past. I used to own a DEQX PDC2.6 and think it can do some wonderful things. That said, I still feel that taking the Linkwitz recommended analog approach is the way to go unless one already owns a PDC or wants the added flexibility that the PDC offers. On a side note, I have used the Behringer DCX2496 with my Orions. While that unit wasn't a complete disaster, I do feel that both the ASP (analog signal processor) and PDC are far better solutions.
Btw, it was some of your original UcD posts which lead me to try these modules. Thank you.
Cheers, mac.
ghemink said:
Yes, I think so. At least that was my experience.
ghemink said:
A few people have asked me about this in the past. I used to own a DEQX PDC2.6 and think it can do some wonderful things. That said, I still feel that taking the Linkwitz recommended analog approach is the way to go unless one already owns a PDC or wants the added flexibility that the PDC offers. On a side note, I have used the Behringer DCX2496 with my Orions. While that unit wasn't a complete disaster, I do feel that both the ASP (analog signal processor) and PDC are far better solutions.
Btw, it was some of your original UcD posts which lead me to try these modules. Thank you.
Cheers, mac.
Re: Re: Re: capacitance multiplier
"some caps" could be for example quite big ones like 10000uF ELNA Cerafine that I have lying around. The RC filter in the capacitance multiplier alos gives a smooth ramping up voltage so that the SMPS in front of the capacitance multiplier does not see such a huge load.
A certain setup I`m thinking about is as follows:
SMPS SPS80 (Coldamp), now used to feed two UcD400 amps for woofers. I added 10000uF ELNA Cerafine to that Coldamp (reduces HF noise very nicely)
Add a "white noise" (maker name) capacitance multiplier (already in my possesion), plan to mod it a bit, hook it up after the SMPS and use it as a supply for two more UcD amps for mid and tweeters.
Doing this, any power supply voltage drop at the SMPS due to heavy bass loading will not reach the mid and tweeter amps.
Best regards
Gertjan
johnrtd said:
"some caps" could be for example quite big ones like 10000uF ELNA Cerafine that I have lying around. The RC filter in the capacitance multiplier alos gives a smooth ramping up voltage so that the SMPS in front of the capacitance multiplier does not see such a huge load.
A certain setup I`m thinking about is as follows:
SMPS SPS80 (Coldamp), now used to feed two UcD400 amps for woofers. I added 10000uF ELNA Cerafine to that Coldamp (reduces HF noise very nicely)
Add a "white noise" (maker name) capacitance multiplier (already in my possesion), plan to mod it a bit, hook it up after the SMPS and use it as a supply for two more UcD amps for mid and tweeters.
Doing this, any power supply voltage drop at the SMPS due to heavy bass loading will not reach the mid and tweeter amps.
Best regards
Gertjan
Stevenacnj said:
t. said:
Currently have UCD 400AD's with the two CRD pads occupied (two pads are located near the opamp).
So according to the above, If I replace the AD8620 opamps with the LM4562's I have to also totally remove th CRD on the -12V line.
Question, as I look at the bottom of the module, with the opamp on the lower right hand side, one CRD pad is located to the lower right of the opamp & one CRD pad is located to the left. Which CRD do I need to remove - lower right of left?
Happy new year & Thanks in advance.
Current regulator
Why does T state that you need to remove the CRD with the 4562? I see no schematic on the chip that would lead me to know if a CRD would work or not and from which rail. I would try it with and without and on the positive rail as well and see what sounds best.
Happy New Year and happy tweaking!
Why does T state that you need to remove the CRD with the 4562? I see no schematic on the chip that would lead me to know if a CRD would work or not and from which rail. I would try it with and without and on the positive rail as well and see what sounds best.
Happy New Year and happy tweaking!
Hi Rick,
I really dont know either way about the -12V rail CRD removal for the LM4562.
Again, my version of the UCD 400AD's have the CRD pads occupied. Also, I do not run a seperate power supply for the opamp. So would be nice to get a clear answer.
Also would appreciate some addional feedback on the sound differences between LM4562 & AD8620.
Thanks in advance
I really dont know either way about the -12V rail CRD removal for the LM4562.
Again, my version of the UCD 400AD's have the CRD pads occupied. Also, I do not run a seperate power supply for the opamp. So would be nice to get a clear answer.
Also would appreciate some addional feedback on the sound differences between LM4562 & AD8620.
Thanks in advance
And the sound quality of PSSR is ?
What difference does 10db of power supply ratio rejection have to do with how biasing the output stage sounds? PSSR has to do with the whole chip, not just the output stage. The only thing you can tell from that spec is that one rail has slightly more PSSR than the other. It tells you nothing about how the output stage is run or specifically whether running a current source from the positive rail or negative rail would sound better. The only way to know which way a CRD would work and if it works is to try it with and without and from both rails. The way it sounds best, is the way it sounds best. I know most here are spec freaks and PSSR is a spec......but what does that spec have to do with the use of a current source on the output? (sonically speaking, of course). Now if you base everything on some spec then I guess the spec you choose might mean something to you. Specs are just numbers....I want living breathing musicians in my room. I trust my ears. Someone else had posted that it would be no good to current source another opamp from the negative rail....I had already sold many modified DVD players with that particular opamp current sourced from the negative rail and can tell you directly that it sounded way better with my current source attached. It is all in your head....but your ears are attached to your head....is a good idea to use them.
Are you listening? Can you hear what I hear? Can you feel what I feel? A star, a star, gleaming from a far will lead to from darkness to light.....he he....xmas songs still in my brain.
Tweak on, dear brothers
What difference does 10db of power supply ratio rejection have to do with how biasing the output stage sounds? PSSR has to do with the whole chip, not just the output stage. The only thing you can tell from that spec is that one rail has slightly more PSSR than the other. It tells you nothing about how the output stage is run or specifically whether running a current source from the positive rail or negative rail would sound better. The only way to know which way a CRD would work and if it works is to try it with and without and from both rails. The way it sounds best, is the way it sounds best. I know most here are spec freaks and PSSR is a spec......but what does that spec have to do with the use of a current source on the output? (sonically speaking, of course). Now if you base everything on some spec then I guess the spec you choose might mean something to you. Specs are just numbers....I want living breathing musicians in my room. I trust my ears. Someone else had posted that it would be no good to current source another opamp from the negative rail....I had already sold many modified DVD players with that particular opamp current sourced from the negative rail and can tell you directly that it sounded way better with my current source attached. It is all in your head....but your ears are attached to your head....is a good idea to use them.
Are you listening? Can you hear what I hear? Can you feel what I feel? A star, a star, gleaming from a far will lead to from darkness to light.....he he....xmas songs still in my brain.
Tweak on, dear brothers
So, because Bruno says something you all bow down?
Don't you have ears of your own? Bruno is a person. You are a person, I am a person. Listening on your own brings wisdom. Following what someONE says brings folly. Now, if a bunch of people listened to a CRD from both rails and all of them said that it SOUNDS best one way with a particular opamp, it would probably be something to pay attention to. Did Bruno even say he did a listening test both ways? Or is this merely his speculation? And did he try it on multiple op amps or just one? Again, your ears are on your head....please use them.....do not trust me....trust yourself.
Don't you have ears of your own? Bruno is a person. You are a person, I am a person. Listening on your own brings wisdom. Following what someONE says brings folly. Now, if a bunch of people listened to a CRD from both rails and all of them said that it SOUNDS best one way with a particular opamp, it would probably be something to pay attention to. Did Bruno even say he did a listening test both ways? Or is this merely his speculation? And did he try it on multiple op amps or just one? Again, your ears are on your head....please use them.....do not trust me....trust yourself.
H Ric,
You know. I see audio products every day that have serious faults that sound fine to the owner. This is over the course of over 30 years. Once the unit is repaired to manufacturer spec., the customer is amazed at the increase in sound quality.
I see a steady stream of "modified" or "improved" equipment that fails to operate properly. They operate, but colour the sound and have high levels of distortion products.
People make terrible witnesses and can be very poor judges of technical things. I do believe you should listen, but the instruments will agree on devices that are truly working well. There is no way you can "engineer by ear". Fails every single time.
I also agree with t. Common sense, it's your guide among wacky or false science.
-Chris
You know. I see audio products every day that have serious faults that sound fine to the owner. This is over the course of over 30 years. Once the unit is repaired to manufacturer spec., the customer is amazed at the increase in sound quality.
I see a steady stream of "modified" or "improved" equipment that fails to operate properly. They operate, but colour the sound and have high levels of distortion products.
People make terrible witnesses and can be very poor judges of technical things. I do believe you should listen, but the instruments will agree on devices that are truly working well. There is no way you can "engineer by ear". Fails every single time.
I also agree with t. Common sense, it's your guide among wacky or false science.
-Chris
I knew it would happen. oh well
What I see is a bunch of stock pieces of equipment made to certain spec standards that lack body, musicality, transparency, immediacy, palpability, depth, air, extension at each end, dynamics, etc. All because someone thought that something needed to be done a certain way. I have yet to see a modified piece of gear that did not blow the stock one away....maybe you hang out with the wrong modders. "Steady stream" of modified units that don't operate properly.....yikes....you really hang out with the wrong people. Color the sound and have high levels of distortion?....yikes.....who are these people?....what do they do to the equipment that would do this?
Most high end companies tweak the circuits and many tweak the parts to give them the best sound. Engineer types only tweak the circuits, but the listener types (many with PHDs and engineering degrees) will do both measurement tests and extensive listening tests always making sure that the measurement that they "think" is important, really is. Basically, we are back to the subjective versus objective point of view....this is why I stated...."I knew it would happen"......I was just waiting for the engineering type to come down on my statements.....even thought they make perfectly good scientific sense.....that is...if the goal of science (in audio) is to improve sound quality....and the best instrument for measuring sound quality is our ears....our direct experience.....This is one of the main reasons why diyaudio.com is mostly poplulated by the objectivists....basically the subjectivist...no matter how much he measures as well will always be put down here....so...feeling not wanted....they leave. I have more stamina...I can take it...he he....someday you might realize that listening tests must take precedence over measurements or real advances in audio sound quality will not happen.
What is common sense to some is nonsense to others. It is not good sense to trust what others write or say.....it is best to trust your direct experience.....and in audio the direct experience is done when listening to music, not looking at wave forms on the scope.....I do both, by the way....but I do know what things on the scope might mean something audibly and what things are meaningless. I don't engineer by ear....I tweak by ear. Engineering will only get you to first base.....I want to hit a grand slam!
Let's now get back to the tweaking and see if we can make these amps sound better.....I don't have any more to say about this.... and the objectivist versus subjectivist thing has had a few thousand rounds already.....it is really quite boring.
What I see is a bunch of stock pieces of equipment made to certain spec standards that lack body, musicality, transparency, immediacy, palpability, depth, air, extension at each end, dynamics, etc. All because someone thought that something needed to be done a certain way. I have yet to see a modified piece of gear that did not blow the stock one away....maybe you hang out with the wrong modders. "Steady stream" of modified units that don't operate properly.....yikes....you really hang out with the wrong people. Color the sound and have high levels of distortion?....yikes.....who are these people?....what do they do to the equipment that would do this?
Most high end companies tweak the circuits and many tweak the parts to give them the best sound. Engineer types only tweak the circuits, but the listener types (many with PHDs and engineering degrees) will do both measurement tests and extensive listening tests always making sure that the measurement that they "think" is important, really is. Basically, we are back to the subjective versus objective point of view....this is why I stated...."I knew it would happen"......I was just waiting for the engineering type to come down on my statements.....even thought they make perfectly good scientific sense.....that is...if the goal of science (in audio) is to improve sound quality....and the best instrument for measuring sound quality is our ears....our direct experience.....This is one of the main reasons why diyaudio.com is mostly poplulated by the objectivists....basically the subjectivist...no matter how much he measures as well will always be put down here....so...feeling not wanted....they leave. I have more stamina...I can take it...he he....someday you might realize that listening tests must take precedence over measurements or real advances in audio sound quality will not happen.
What is common sense to some is nonsense to others. It is not good sense to trust what others write or say.....it is best to trust your direct experience.....and in audio the direct experience is done when listening to music, not looking at wave forms on the scope.....I do both, by the way....but I do know what things on the scope might mean something audibly and what things are meaningless. I don't engineer by ear....I tweak by ear. Engineering will only get you to first base.....I want to hit a grand slam!
Let's now get back to the tweaking and see if we can make these amps sound better.....I don't have any more to say about this.... and the objectivist versus subjectivist thing has had a few thousand rounds already.....it is really quite boring.
Hi Ric,
Any good designer or design team engineers the product properly and also listens to the result. The particular sound some products are known for are just tweaked that way. The same thing you seem to recommend except they can keep the equipment together when it's running. You ought to have proper technical training before you start changing a design.
I said "I do believe you should listen, but the instruments will agree on devices that are truly working well." What that means is that what you hear and measure are equally important. When both agree you've done a good job. No one ever said that just because you measure something that you exclude all other evidence. You must weigh both equally. Designing by one or the other method alone will not make a good sounding product.
I do not understand how you can disagree with that.
-Chris
Then, you are listening to the wrong stuff my friend.
Only as it explodes due to improper circuit "corrections".
Not even close.
Any good designer or design team engineers the product properly and also listens to the result. The particular sound some products are known for are just tweaked that way. The same thing you seem to recommend except they can keep the equipment together when it's running. You ought to have proper technical training before you start changing a design.
Get real!
I said "I do believe you should listen, but the instruments will agree on devices that are truly working well." What that means is that what you hear and measure are equally important. When both agree you've done a good job. No one ever said that just because you measure something that you exclude all other evidence. You must weigh both equally. Designing by one or the other method alone will not make a good sounding product.
I do not understand how you can disagree with that.
-Chris
Again, given a UDC 400AD with both CRD pads popoluated -
Is there any harm replacing the AD 8620 with an LM 4562 & leaving both CRD's in place? Will the unit run?
Also on the above UCD module, does anyone know the board id # for the surface mount opamp supply caps? I am thinking about adding bypass caps to those SMD's.
Thanks in advance.
Is there any harm replacing the AD 8620 with an LM 4562 & leaving both CRD's in place? Will the unit run?
Also on the above UCD module, does anyone know the board id # for the surface mount opamp supply caps? I am thinking about adding bypass caps to those SMD's.
Thanks in advance.
Yes its getting boring , very boring!
I agree with Chris, You ought to have proper technical training before you start changing a design.
Some tweaks you should listen and see if you like it but theres other tweaks you should do the right way and then listen to it, doing it the wrong way and expecting it to sound better isn't going to work
I agree with Chris, You ought to have proper technical training before you start changing a design.
Some tweaks you should listen and see if you like it but theres other tweaks you should do the right way and then listen to it, doing it the wrong way and expecting it to sound better isn't going to work
Yes, the LM4562 can be swapped in but the CRD's need to be connected to the positive supply, not the negative supply as per the CRD connections on the circuit board. You can cut the tracks and hard wire them to suit (dont forget to reverse the orientation of the CRD).
Add tantalum caps about 4.7uf to both supply rails of the opamp, soldered across the opamp supply pins or close by.
Regards,
Dean
Add tantalum caps about 4.7uf to both supply rails of the opamp, soldered across the opamp supply pins or close by.
Regards,
Dean
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.