Graham Slee
Gentlemen
Please remember that what Graham Slee is saying in his explanations, is also simplified for the benefit of the bulk of Rock Grotto members, who are non technical people.
Graham Slee's explanations would have been very much more detailed, and unambiguous, if addressed to a group of Industry heavweights, and retired famous designers, such as many of you are.
Kind Regards
SandyK
Gentlemen
Please remember that what Graham Slee is saying in his explanations, is also simplified for the benefit of the bulk of Rock Grotto members, who are non technical people.
Graham Slee's explanations would have been very much more detailed, and unambiguous, if addressed to a group of Industry heavweights, and retired famous designers, such as many of you are.
Kind Regards
SandyK
john curl said:
Actually, I think I do understand. I may not have all the data, I concede that.
john curl said:
Sure, and this guy uses opamps. We were talking about a 1200$ thing with a couple of opamps. So would you agree then that this is a grossly overpriced thing? The guy even uses the scratches to make it look as if he can handle it, with his cheap opamps. Good catch John!
Jan Didden
Re: Graham Slee
Yes, I think you've mentioned it before here in the forum and I remembered this
. Anyway, I've found long time ago that you need this bandwidth, however I just used no feedback approach in the circuit I've designed for Creek in 1994 - one that with some modifications they still use even now, AFAIK.
That is exactly why I've posted the link. This thread is more or less about how precise and accurate one should be presenting ideas and equipment to the public and where a simplified explanation (i.e. using the "dirty sand" expression or that the "slow" opamp "rails" or clips when deals with a fast transient on the input) transgresses into advertising.
He mentions that he uses fast opamps - and that is the reason why he needs 680 Ohm on the output.
Cheers
Alex
john curl said:
Yes, I think you've mentioned it before here in the forum and I remembered this
. Anyway, I've found long time ago that you need this bandwidth, however I just used no feedback approach in the circuit I've designed for Creek in 1994 - one that with some modifications they still use even now, AFAIK.sandyK said:
That is exactly why I've posted the link. This thread is more or less about how precise and accurate one should be presenting ideas and equipment to the public and where a simplified explanation (i.e. using the "dirty sand" expression or that the "slow" opamp "rails" or clips when deals with a fast transient on the input) transgresses into advertising.
janneman said:
He mentions that he uses fast opamps - and that is the reason why he needs 680 Ohm on the output.
Cheers
Alex
About "Cheap" IC's
John,
"Cheap" IC's can have internal parts that are far better matched then one can do with discrete components. I'd agree more with your statement if this was 25 years ago, but improvements in IC technology (mostly from the microprocessor side) have largely eliminated most IC problems. As an example, the old problem with making decent PNP transistors on a die was dealt with over a decade ago!
As far as the phono preamp stuff goes, while the mechanics and masses of the stylus, cantiliver and magnets (or coils) surely do not let microsecond pulses off the groove of the record get through! Perhaps what you see is some kind of secondary ringing or other pulse. I do believe that you see it, and I've always believed that using stable gain stages and passive RIAA equalization has always sounded better then active. Perhaps this is due to the reasons you state .
Remember, most IC's used in equipment today (such as the AD 71x series, the 5532 and 5534, and all the RC45xx ones were designed 15 or more years ago. The newer generation ones are of a brand new design, and incorporate all the newest IC engineering techniques.
This new generation of National IC's is the real deal! I've tried to make them sound bad, and I can't. Some of these other video amps also show promise. Instead of trashing them, why not try using them? Instead of snobbishly dismissing "all IC's" out of hand, why not pick up the gauntlet and try building products that can (finally) provide TRUE hifi audio to the masses? It's pretty clear that the CD went only a small part of the way-now you can be a big part of the "next generation"!
Who would have thought a few years ago that the average TV set would have an audiophile grade power amp within it? Yet many of them do today-a T amp. What's wrong with that? Is true hifi supposed to be the realm of a few rich snobs? I don't believe that, and I'd say that most here don't either!
Right now, I have the '70's channel from cable Music Choice on my stereo. Is it the ultimate Hi Fi? Absolutely not! BUT-it still sounds pretty good-IC's, T Amp and all, not to mention that the song that just came on (Argent-Hold Your head Up) is one that I haven't heard in a while, and rather then critiquing the audio, I'm too busy enjoying the tune!
Isn't THAT supposed to be what it's all about?
John,
"Cheap" IC's can have internal parts that are far better matched then one can do with discrete components. I'd agree more with your statement if this was 25 years ago, but improvements in IC technology (mostly from the microprocessor side) have largely eliminated most IC problems. As an example, the old problem with making decent PNP transistors on a die was dealt with over a decade ago!
As far as the phono preamp stuff goes, while the mechanics and masses of the stylus, cantiliver and magnets (or coils) surely do not let microsecond pulses off the groove of the record get through! Perhaps what you see is some kind of secondary ringing or other pulse. I do believe that you see it, and I've always believed that using stable gain stages and passive RIAA equalization has always sounded better then active. Perhaps this is due to the reasons you state .
Remember, most IC's used in equipment today (such as the AD 71x series, the 5532 and 5534, and all the RC45xx ones were designed 15 or more years ago. The newer generation ones are of a brand new design, and incorporate all the newest IC engineering techniques.
This new generation of National IC's is the real deal! I've tried to make them sound bad, and I can't. Some of these other video amps also show promise. Instead of trashing them, why not try using them? Instead of snobbishly dismissing "all IC's" out of hand, why not pick up the gauntlet and try building products that can (finally) provide TRUE hifi audio to the masses? It's pretty clear that the CD went only a small part of the way-now you can be a big part of the "next generation"!
Who would have thought a few years ago that the average TV set would have an audiophile grade power amp within it? Yet many of them do today-a T amp. What's wrong with that? Is true hifi supposed to be the realm of a few rich snobs? I don't believe that, and I'd say that most here don't either!
Right now, I have the '70's channel from cable Music Choice on my stereo. Is it the ultimate Hi Fi? Absolutely not! BUT-it still sounds pretty good-IC's, T Amp and all, not to mention that the song that just came on (Argent-Hold Your head Up) is one that I haven't heard in a while, and rather then critiquing the audio, I'm too busy enjoying the tune!
Isn't THAT supposed to be what it's all about?
If you feel that class T amps--at their current state of development--constitute 'audiophile grade' equipment, then there's a wide chasm between where you're standing and where I stand. If they make you happy, that's fine, but by no stretch of imagination are they audiophile grade; mid-fi would be more accurate.
If your argument for accepting chip opamps is based on internal parts matching, then you are at least as far out of date as you accuse John of being.
Grey
If your argument for accepting chip opamps is based on internal parts matching, then you are at least as far out of date as you accuse John of being.
Grey
GRollins said:
Bel Canto, Audio Research and more seem to think otherwise... A good 2024 Tripath amp for example - with the right set of speakers of course - can sound really really good (what some would call entry-level HiEnd).
If we expand the discussion to include Class D amps as well, the list grows even longer...
Oh, if you can make an amp that performs half as good as, say, a Trends Audio TA-10.1 with a budget of $100 (or even $200, I'm in a good mood today), please don't forget to post the schematics!
I do hear good things about National, these days. Good! Maybe they actually allow more output stage class A than most op amps. Trust me, most op amps have very little class A region. That is the only place that they can 'steal' current and still make spec. Nobody looks at the 1V out distortion without noise, so they get away with it.
john curl said:
So will you give them a fair shot and just listen to them?
I seems you did just that for those overstock (german?) caps you said sounded so good. At least National will have intended for their product to sound good, unlike the accidental component manufacturers, who obviously had no clue that they were making "audiophile grade" products at the time, if they don't know why.
cheers,
AJ
TheShaman,
Just because Audio Research, for instance, makes a digital amp does not mean they think it's equal to their other product. For that matter, even ARC's tube units have had an uneven history, some being distinctly inferior to others. Their solid state gear has never been all that great--just decent, at best. Assuming that all product from a given manufacturer is great will get you in trouble; or at least you'll waste a lot of money.
AJ,
Actually, I was waiting for you to define high end. If, for instance, it's predicated on distortion specs, you're going to have a pretty rough time explaining how so many wildly different sounding units get classed in the same group.
Grey
Just because Audio Research, for instance, makes a digital amp does not mean they think it's equal to their other product. For that matter, even ARC's tube units have had an uneven history, some being distinctly inferior to others. Their solid state gear has never been all that great--just decent, at best. Assuming that all product from a given manufacturer is great will get you in trouble; or at least you'll waste a lot of money.
AJ,
Actually, I was waiting for you to define high end. If, for instance, it's predicated on distortion specs, you're going to have a pretty rough time explaining how so many wildly different sounding units get classed in the same group.
Grey
GRollins said:
I believe that a properly modified Sonic Impact T amp, powered by a good, stiff power supply CAN sound high end. PLENTY of people agree with me. Does it sound as good as my heavily modified Dynaco Mark III's driving my KLH 9's? No. Is it close?
YES!
Do my full range speakers with 6 inch drivers sound as good as the Nines (by the way, the KLH Model 9 still is considered by many to be the gold standard of speakers)? No. Are they close?
Yes.
Have YOU heard my system? No. Does that give you the right to judge it? NO!!!
See, I believe that good audio doesn't have to be expensive audio. I might not have your megabucks system, but then again, I don't WANT your megabucks system! I paid under 100 dollars for my Nines. Granted, I did pay about 500 dollars to have them completely rebuilt, but again, that's hardly megabucks. I bought my Dynas (and my Mac 225 and 240's) for 25 dollars each. Part of what I enjoy is making good sound for minimum $$$.
THIS is the reason that I'm so excited about these new opamps. Do I believe that someone should charge a grand for a two opamp preamp? Hardly. In fact, that's the OPPOSITE of what I want or believe. I'd rather make and sell a thousand preamps for 100 dollars apiece then sell 50 for a thousand dollars each. Not only do you make more money, but you also expose more people to good audio. That's more people who can hear when a CD sounds like crap-so the record label gets more complaint calls and fixes the problem. That's more people buying audio gear who result in more companies making better sounding products. EVERYONE BENEFITS!
I believe that my philosophy has been shared by many others. Henry Kloss is one who comes to mind. Victor Campos is another. Have you ever heard of the Advent 300 receiver? Well, you should hear how good one sounds with half the capaciitors gone and a servo in their place! But that CAN'T sound good, because it doesn't cost 10 grand! Right?
W R O N G!!!
I stopped subscribing to Stereophile years ago, because I found the correlation between good sound and megabucks too obvious.
Maybe...JUST MAYBE..technology has finally caught up with them. It's hard to claim there's distortion when it's 120 db down!
As far as John's class A comment, he is correct-IC opamps have never been good at driving low Z (less then about 5K) loads well-particularly when the load is also highly capacitive. But, this opamp can dump over 20 milliamps into a 600 ohm load, so I' m hopeful that it's running class A when driving a 10 k or higher load. They do have that smooth class A sound though. In any case, it's easy to run a 3.3K resistor between the output and the negative rail to deal with that...or a current source if you really want to do things right.
Speaking of capacitive loads, if you want to make some really good low capacitance interconnects (that preamps LOVE driving all day), pick up some RG-62 coax and solder RCA connectors on it. If you can't find any RG-62, then find an old AM auto antenna and use the connecting cable from that. Interconnects that cost less that 5 bucks and blow away 500 dollar ones! But, don't believe me...listen for yourself.
The only caveat is that its shield isn't 100% coverage, so don't use it for really low level things like turntables.
dpuopolo,
Goodness me...touched a nerve, did I? With such a rambling post, I'm not sure where to begin. I never said that you or anyone else had to spend tens of thousands of dollars. I never said there's a 1:1 correspondence between price and sound quality (something obviously inherent in the post you quoted). If you're excited about digital amps, then good for you. I prefer stuff that sounds better. It need not cost as much as a moon shot, though, particularly if you build it yourself.
However...
If you think that table radios are high end, you've still got a bit to learn. Reread that if necessary...I didn't say it didn't sound fairly good, I said it's not high end. Your reading comprehension needs working on.
And if you think that CD manufacturers give a flip what the end consumer thinks, you're a lost ball in high weeds. We're over twenty-five years into digital and it's long been clear that they will not 'fix' a bad sounding CD unless and until they decide to reissue it, which means that many CDs never get fixed. If the uproar in the early '80s didn't accomplish anything, I don't think they're losing any sleep over the possibility of a mass uprising now.
Grey
Goodness me...touched a nerve, did I? With such a rambling post, I'm not sure where to begin. I never said that you or anyone else had to spend tens of thousands of dollars. I never said there's a 1:1 correspondence between price and sound quality (something obviously inherent in the post you quoted). If you're excited about digital amps, then good for you. I prefer stuff that sounds better. It need not cost as much as a moon shot, though, particularly if you build it yourself.
However...
If you think that table radios are high end, you've still got a bit to learn. Reread that if necessary...I didn't say it didn't sound fairly good, I said it's not high end. Your reading comprehension needs working on.
And if you think that CD manufacturers give a flip what the end consumer thinks, you're a lost ball in high weeds. We're over twenty-five years into digital and it's long been clear that they will not 'fix' a bad sounding CD unless and until they decide to reissue it, which means that many CDs never get fixed. If the uproar in the early '80s didn't accomplish anything, I don't think they're losing any sleep over the possibility of a mass uprising now.
Grey
Drifting OT, but reissues of CDs an improvement? I'm not convinced the reissues or "remastered" CDs I've purchased are any better than the originals, and don't come close to what the original vinyl could do. IMO, the master tapes may be showing their age, and the re-release is just marketing, not technical improvements. I just picked up the re-release of the old Herb Alpert Whipped Cream and Other Delights, and it actually has audible sloppy edits (or something) that I don't think were ever in the original vinyl. Audiophiles are not the target audience of the music industry, so where do we get our program material to go with these hi-end systems?
I think the whole "high-end" market exists because of the lack of quality of the consumer equipment and media. Perhaps, many years ago, the two markets were much closer to each other. Now most don't care. especially the large companies.
There are a few individuals left who do good reissues, and do it right. But no large record companies do that I know of . I remember the whole first wave of CDs that were mastered from re-EQ'd vinyl masters. Remember all the hiss from the extra generation of tape.
There are a few individuals left who do good reissues, and do it right. But no large record companies do that I know of . I remember the whole first wave of CDs that were mastered from re-EQ'd vinyl masters. Remember all the hiss from the extra generation of tape.
labjr said:
IPod, anyone?
There has been a slow, but steady drift from quality towards convenience. Don't get me wrong...I'm all for convenience, but it shouldn't be at the expense of quality. But my opinion doesn't match that of the majority of the public.
TheShaman said:
Whether you want to believe it or not, the name on the face plate does not guarantee any given level of sound quality--the most you can say is that it increases the odds.
Do you believe that every car ever built by a given manufacturer is always of a given quality? Every computer? Every airplane? Every book written by a particular author? There's no reason that audio electronics should be exempt.
Grey
P.S.: Being in the author trade myself, I can tell you that the marketing of John Grisham is a fascinating (albeit somewhat depressing) example of what a heavy advertising budget can achieve. It was recognized among authors long before his name became widely known that Grisham was being groomed for best-seller status. But that doesn't mean that he's a particularly good author. It means that his publisher needed someone like Stephen King, or Tom Clancy--both of whom were huge at the time. They selected Grisham and "made" him.
Marketing is a separate and distinct beast. It can play an enormous role in developing a brand name...or almost none. Every case is different. Sometimes you have a sleeper who goes ballistic without any help at all from the marketing department. Case in point: J.K. Rowling. It was only after she shot to the top that the marketing people realized that they had a bona fide star on their hands and started pushing. The rest is history. If someone with an ounce of sense would drop a dollar on Brian Jacques, he'd be a certified hit as well; all he needs is a tiny push.
GRollins said:
So you have heard all the Class D/T products of the following companies:
- Acoustic Reality
- Aivin
- Analog Research Technology
- AudioArt
- Audiodigit
- Audio Research
- AV123
- B&O
- BelCanto
- Bertram
- Bryston
- Carver
- Cary Audio
- Channel Islands Audio
- Chapter Audio
- D-Sonic
- DIYCable
- Egosys
- Elan
- Electronic Visionary Systems
- Flying Mole
- Gilmore Audio
- Halcro
- Hypex
- H2O Audio
- Integra /Onkyo
- Jeff Rowland
- Jjaz Audio
- Kharma
- LC Audio
- Marantz
- Medius
- MG Audiolabs
- Midgard Audio
- MindCraft
- Murano Audio
- NHT
- NuForce
- NuVo Technologies
- Onkyo
- PSAudio
- Red Dragon Audio
- RedWineAudio
- Rotel
- Sharp
- Sonneteer
- Sony
- Spectron
- TactAudio/Lyngford
- TEAC Esoteric
- ThetaDigital
- UniwaveTek
- Yamaha
...and found them to be only mid-fi.
Alright. I guess the people who developed those products and the people who built those amps, along with the thousands of buyers around the world, including all the people that write on the Class D subforum here, as well as the reviewers around the globe (because many of those products have got rave reviews from numerous magazines and websites) have gone deaf and have forgotten what a good amp sounds like. It must be a plague.
That list is supposed to impress me? B&O? Yamaha? Sony? Oh, puhleeze!
Class D will make inroads simply because it's efficient, hence "green." A lot of manufacturers are sticking toes in the water simply as a concession to the trend. That doesn't equate to a sudden realization that class D is some sort of a revolutionary advance in the sonic arts. Quite the opposite--it's cheap to manufacture, efficient, light weight, and...convenient. But convenient isn't always (in fact, rarely) better in terms of sound quality. Cheap equates to higher profit margins--always a seductive concept.
If you're the sort of person who thinks that the masses are always right, then buy a class D amp and be happy. You're just the sort of person they're looking for.
But you've got a long road ahead of you if you truly value quality sound reproduction. Don't feel too bad about it...I had to learn the hard way, myself. It took years and lots of my hard-earned cash before I discovered that mid-fi wasn't good enough.
Grey
Class D will make inroads simply because it's efficient, hence "green." A lot of manufacturers are sticking toes in the water simply as a concession to the trend. That doesn't equate to a sudden realization that class D is some sort of a revolutionary advance in the sonic arts. Quite the opposite--it's cheap to manufacture, efficient, light weight, and...convenient. But convenient isn't always (in fact, rarely) better in terms of sound quality. Cheap equates to higher profit margins--always a seductive concept.
If you're the sort of person who thinks that the masses are always right, then buy a class D amp and be happy. You're just the sort of person they're looking for.
But you've got a long road ahead of you if you truly value quality sound reproduction. Don't feel too bad about it...I had to learn the hard way, myself. It took years and lots of my hard-earned cash before I discovered that mid-fi wasn't good enough.
Grey
- Status
- Not open for further replies.