@jacco vermeulen: or to my beloved dutch neighbor
No problem...really.
Well, the best loudspeaker is probably a DIY LS, cos taste is a big factor here. Some want real linearity and prefers i.e. a BBC 3/5 with 82dB eff. some others want attack and speed regardless of linearity or colorations like Lowther. The only thing I can say is: If you don't have a Heil AMT or Raven you don't have a highend tweeter. This is the only objective statement I can give cos this tweeters are lightyears better than the rest in any respect.
No problem...really.
Well, the best loudspeaker is probably a DIY LS, cos taste is a big factor here. Some want real linearity and prefers i.e. a BBC 3/5 with 82dB eff. some others want attack and speed regardless of linearity or colorations like Lowther. The only thing I can say is: If you don't have a Heil AMT or Raven you don't have a highend tweeter. This is the only objective statement I can give cos this tweeters are lightyears better than the rest in any respect.
Sony said:
1. Well, you can also connect 99% of the speakers to a KT-88PP without any problems.
2. If you really think that a Technics will sound better...maybe louder. But please.... we don't want to get too unrealistic here, or?
3. Many audiophiles think that only tubes work with SACD because it is lacking the organic sound of DVD-A.
4. Simply untrue. I know many people serious about music owning all-tube systems.
5. This is even more untrue and scientifically pure nonsense cos it is a fact that transistors have more thermical problems and drift as valves. I repaired audio equipment from 1995 to 2001 and can tell you that you have to bias a transistor amp nearly every year and a transistor amp not biased for several years will sound VERY different. So please....
choky said:
best gadgets for creation or recreation of music in this world are made primary with love (passion) and knowledge- and then only secondary with tubes or transistors
I have chance to hear or repair or make some of best beforementioned gadgets and I can tell you (or anybody else) that I will never again make fool of me commenting "how tubes (or transistor,doesn't matter which you choose) are better than ......"
cheers to all open minded (and to others,too
ps-even Technics made few decent amps , but Pass's amps are not in any meaning or form in league of Technics
Well said, I agree fully to your statements. My friends are much more critical towards transistors cos even high priced amps like Burmester or Krell are really RIP-OFFs with bad to mediocre parts. I think that a X-600 have some merits, I liked the clarity in the mids and also the maybe-too-dry bass. Mr Pass did a wonderful job bringing the best out of the semicons. Personally I would prefer a X-600 over 90% of the tubed amps.
Nelson Pass said:
To the first question, I choose a limited field in which I can
make some significant progress, and I find it more interesting
to pursue getting music out of transistors. It seems to me that
there are already plenty of people working on doing that with
tubes, but after all these years I still see that in general the
transistor designs are overly complex. Since I think that
complexity tends to be the nemesis of musicality, this seems
a natural place to explore. Of course, tubes by their very nature
tend to enforce some simplicity on the designer.
I have used Mosfets because they allow more simplicity in a
circuit than bipolar and even tube gain devices. Until recently,
it was the only device that would allow a practical single-stage
power amplifier. Of course now I have a stock of power JFETs,
and it may be that they will serve me better in the future.
I don't think the MJ15003/4 as modern parts anymore, but that
aside, I have no idea why the Accuphase would sound better
than the X600. Perhaps you should hear an X600.5.
These are wise words and I agree completely. I also think that more complexity means less sound quality, everytime I simplified my amps they sound beter than before or closer to the music. This is also true for sound recordings. Listening to Frank Sinatras 3 mics direct to 3 track Amperex reel to reel recordings (Capitol 1960's) will reveal how bad most of the recordings are with multitrack and tons of gadgets.
With modern parts I ment of course the caps, wiring, resistors etc.
Dear Roger K,
I was tricked like this too. Unlike the usual layout of User Manual.pdf and Service Manual.pdf, I think that the SERVICE manual for the Aleph 30 is actually appended to the USER manual for the Aleph 30. If I recall correctly, just keep scrolling down and you will get to it.
Hope this helps,
Mark Walsh.
I was tricked like this too. Unlike the usual layout of User Manual.pdf and Service Manual.pdf, I think that the SERVICE manual for the Aleph 30 is actually appended to the USER manual for the Aleph 30. If I recall correctly, just keep scrolling down and you will get to it.
Hope this helps,
Mark Walsh.
And the Aleph J review...have not read it yet.
http://6moons.com/audioreviews/firstwatt3/alephj.html
http://6moons.com/audioreviews/firstwatt3/alephj.html
I have combined my Aleph J whith a Shindo Aurieges Tube pre and I am verrry happy whith it.
I am thankfull for the high Input Impedance of the Aleph J which i think allows this combination.
The only (very small) Problems are that it has a littel to much overall gain and sometimes it tends to have a littel too warm Sound. Both nothing to realy worry about.
I am thankfull for the high Input Impedance of the Aleph J which i think allows this combination.
The only (very small) Problems are that it has a littel to much overall gain and sometimes it tends to have a littel too warm Sound. Both nothing to realy worry about.
Dynamic output feedback
I'm a new DIYer and would like to discuss a little about the operation of Aleph J.
Referring to the attached Aleph J (AJ) schematic, I can see that the obvious modification of AJ compared to Aleph 3 (A3) falls at the negative feedback (NFB) portion. Unlike A3, where a constant 0.1 (1k/10k=0.1) gain of output is feedbacked, AJ have a dynamic feedback, and the feedback varies from 0.091 to 0.092, between 20Hz to 20kHz. The following are my questions:
1.) I don't understand why the increase of negative feedback at high frequency can be useful in music reproduction.
2.) Referring to the schematic again, I don quite understand the use of Q3, which functions as if a constant current source.
P.S: I would like to have a more understanding on how Aleph 3 work. Could you please direct links that explain A3 in detail?
Thanks in advance.
I'm a new DIYer and would like to discuss a little about the operation of Aleph J.
Referring to the attached Aleph J (AJ) schematic, I can see that the obvious modification of AJ compared to Aleph 3 (A3) falls at the negative feedback (NFB) portion. Unlike A3, where a constant 0.1 (1k/10k=0.1) gain of output is feedbacked, AJ have a dynamic feedback, and the feedback varies from 0.091 to 0.092, between 20Hz to 20kHz. The following are my questions:
1.) I don't understand why the increase of negative feedback at high frequency can be useful in music reproduction.
2.) Referring to the schematic again, I don quite understand the use of Q3, which functions as if a constant current source.
P.S: I would like to have a more understanding on how Aleph 3 work. Could you please direct links that explain A3 in detail?
Thanks in advance.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.