Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Stumbled across this
Chelvam
Posted Sep 15, 2004 22:52:59 Subject: The Audiophile's Project Sourcebook by an Electronics Engineer This is a site where we can read of a review of a book written by "very talented and experienced Electronics Engineer", G. Randy Stone. Mr Stone while explaining the basic electronics stuff he also talked about the some myth and urban legends. http://www.electronics-tutorials.com...project-source book.htm Make sure you read his own seal electronics. Selling DIY parts and his Sweet Amp which is " the finest performing audio power amplifiers available at any price". Surprisingly, not cheap. and some excerpts from his FAQ 6. Aren't there complex characteristics or nuances of sound that cannot be analytically interpreted when comparing amplifier types? Isn't the "best" amplifier a matter of personal taste? It has been scientifically proven on a number of occasions and with a variety of tests that there are no mysterious sonic qualities undetectable to analysis equipment. Therefore, the determination of quality is a relatively straightforward process of measuring the sonic accuracy between the amplifier's input and output. In other words, the "best" amplifier will be the most "transparent." Obviously, it is every individual's right to have a personal sound preference, but, generally speaking, professional sound engineers choose power amplifiers with the lowest distortion and highest reliability. 7. How about Class-A audio power amplifiers? Don't they sound better than Class-B designs? To make the statement that one amplifier sounds better than another poses the requirement that the differences in sonic reproduction be discernable to the human ear. It has been proven that the human ear is capable of detecting high-order odd harmonic distortion as low as 0.3%. Crossover distortion, as produced by Class-B operation, is the worst kind of distortion, being high-order odd harmonics across the entire audio bandwidth and existent at virtually all signal levels. The worst-case conditions for crossover distortion is at very low volume levels at high frequencies (i.e. close to 20 kHz). Even under these extremes, several of the amplifier kits in this catalog are typically capable of THD levels better than 7 times lower than the minimum audible level. Therefore, in these or similar designs, it is quite impossible to detect a difference between Class-A and Class-B operation based on human perception, as long as all other performance variables are identical. 8. Do all of your amplifier kits incorporate high levels of global negative feedback? Are high feedback levels detrimental to sonic quality? The belief that certain sonic problems result from high levels of global (i.e. overall) negative feedback is a myth. In reality, high levels of feedback improve virtually every performance aspect of audio power amplifiers. "Chelvam" |chelvam([at]myjaring.net| said ciah4b0n7f([at]news3.newsguy.com... | This is a site where we can read of a review of a book written by "very | talented and experienced Electronics Engineer", G. Randy Stone. Mr Stone | while explaining the basic electronics stuff he also talked about the some | myth and urban legends. His name is Slone, not Stone. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Keep stumbling, Mikey. You are "special."
Try not to fall down. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Robert Morein" wrote in message ... Keep stumbling, Mikey. You are "special." Try not to fall down. Try to sleep it off somewhere I won't be likely to trip over you. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Slone is a dildo who writes ****ty books on ****ty amp building.
From amazon.com reviews: "Of this entire book, thirty or forty pages at the very most are useful and then only if you want to build his amplifier. I'm not even an audio engineer and just looking at his schematics I can see where the Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs we all studied in the 70s and 80s show those designers learned things he hasn't." "Unfortunately, for hobbyists and serious music reproduction fans, he's wrong. Circuits and parts do have sonic faults and attributes test sets, as useful and ingenious as they are, just can't address. Gas spectroscopy is an incredibly useful tool for science, but it's of little use in separating truly great wines from Thunderbird. These amps and associated circuits are perhaps not audio Thunderbird, but they're not a fine Chardonnay." "As for all this "controversy" on tubes, the definitive source is indeed still Hamm's JAES paper, "Tubes vs. Transistors". That Slone doesn't cite it reveals that he just was too lazy to do his homework because it actually reinforced certain of his arguments, or too dense to perceive it. This paper has been reprinted so frequently that anyone interested will be able to find it easily." "Basically this whole book is the effort of a hayseed electronics vendor to peddle his own kits of plain vanilla grade stereo equipment. With skilled electronic assemblers in America getting $8.30/hr (and equally skilled Asians getting that per day!) and components in hobby quantities bringing a 50 to 500 percent premium over what commercial buyers pay even in 100 piece quantities, he claims a hobbyist can better commercial grade designs in his hobby workshop cheaper." "This reminds me of Fred Willard's character in the excellent film, "A Mighty Wind". One of his catchphrases-"I Don't Think So!"-applies here." "I think Mr Slone is basically an electronics nerd who hates High End audio because it costs money and involves people who are trendy and fashionable and often buy it for pristege." Ad nauseum. Slone sucks! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
oups.com Slone is a dildo who writes ****ty books on ****ty amp building. Really? From amazon.com reviews: "Of this entire book, thirty or forty pages at the very most are useful and then only if you want to build his amplifier. I'm not even an audio engineer and just looking at his schematics I can see where the Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs we all studied in the 70s and 80s show those designers learned things he hasn't." Some kind of armchair expert? Fool that I am I built examples of Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs. There was no magic. I've been told by co-workers at Dyna that Bongiourno was a drunk and a poser. Court records suggest that Carver is a poser who more recently has tried to support himself by litigating bogus patents. Hafler is the only one on this list who could be called the real thing, but at some point he stopped innovating. Unfortunately it was long before he stopped selling. "Unfortunately, for hobbyists and serious music reproduction fans, he's wrong. Circuits and parts do have sonic faults and attributes test sets, as useful and ingenious as they are, just can't address. Obviously, someone who believes in magic. Gas spectroscopy is an incredibly useful tool for science, but it's of little use in separating truly great wines from Thunderbird. These amps and associated circuits are perhaps not audio Thunderbird, but they're not a fine Chardonnay." The irony is that audio is about reproduction while wine-making is about both production and reproduction. The author has obviously confused the two. "As for all this "controversy" on tubes, the definitive source is indeed still Hamm's JAES paper, "Tubes vs. Transistors". An article that was an embarassment to the AES when it was published, and things only went downhill since then. That Slone doesn't cite it reveals that he just was too lazy to do his homework because it actually reinforced certain of his arguments, or too dense to perceive it. This paper has been reprinted so frequently that anyone interested will be able to find it easily." No, that Slone didn't cite Hamm shows that he has two or more brain cells to rub together. "Basically this whole book is the effort of a hayseed electronics vendor to peddle his own kits of plain vanilla grade stereo equipment. These days, plain vanilla stereo equipment is often really pretty good. ith skilled electronic assemblers in America getting $8.30/hr (and equally skilled Asians getting that per day!) and components in hobby quantities bringing a 50 to 500 percent premium over what commercial buyers pay even in 100 piece quantities, he claims a hobbyist can better commercial grade designs in his hobby workshop cheaper." How long has it been since Heathkit sacked their audio business? That was driven by the fact that assembled gear was becoming cheaper than a credible kit. It was as much about the decreasing cost of audio parts, as the decreasing cost of audio assembly, driven by automation as much if not more than by low labor costs in the Pacific rim. "This reminds me of Fred Willard's character in the excellent film, "A Mighty Wind". One of his catchphrases-"I Don't Think So!"-applies here." "I think Mr Slone is basically an electronics nerd who hates High End audio because it costs money and involves people who are trendy and fashionable and often buy it for pristege." Ah, the usual radical subjectivist reference to class warfare. Ad nauseum. Slone sucks! Someone needs to buy, beg or steal a much-needed clue. Trouble is, he won't find it in the high end. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message oups.com... Slone is a dildo who writes ****ty books on ****ty amp building. From amazon.com reviews: "Of this entire book, thirty or forty pages at the very most are useful and then only if you want to build his amplifier. I'm not even an audio engineer and just looking at his schematics I can see where the Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs we all studied in the 70s and 80s show those designers learned things he hasn't." Who wrote the review? I findi it hard to believe that building any amp doesn't have spillover into other areas. Since there aren't that many topologies to draw from in amplifer design, there doesn't seem to be much validity to a review wrotten by an admitted non-engineer, IMO. "Unfortunately, for hobbyists and serious music reproduction fans, he's wrong. Circuits and parts do have sonic faults and attributes test sets, as useful and ingenious as they are, just can't address. And the evidence of this is what, more anecdote? Gas spectroscopy is an incredibly useful tool for science, but it's of little use in separating truly great wines from Thunderbird. These amps and associated circuits are perhaps not audio Thunderbird, but they're not a fine Chardonnay." Does it pass a signal that is the same as the input? If so it's as good as it needs to be. "As for all this "controversy" on tubes, the definitive source is indeed still Hamm's JAES paper, "Tubes vs. Transistors". That Slone doesn't cite it reveals that he just was too lazy to do his homework because it actually reinforced certain of his arguments, or too dense to perceive it. This paper has been reprinted so frequently that anyone interested will be able to find it easily." Perhaps it reveals that he simply understands that by comparison, tubes are crap. They are like light bulbs, deteriorating from the moment they are plugged in. "Basically this whole book is the effort of a hayseed electronics vendor to peddle his own kits of plain vanilla grade stereo equipment. With skilled electronic assemblers in America getting $8.30/hr (and equally skilled Asians getting that per day!) and components in hobby quantities bringing a 50 to 500 percent premium over what commercial buyers pay even in 100 piece quantities, he claims a hobbyist can better commercial grade designs in his hobby workshop cheaper." Hmmmm, have you notice how there aren't any amp kits to speak of for SS units? The reason is simple, the cost of mass producing component parts and buying in the volume that mass market manufacturers do, vs. the hobby shop electronics parts stores makes it MORE expensive for the hobbyist. This tends to take some of the impetus away from that aspect of the audio hobby. There are some tube kits that allow somebody who wants to build a 4 watt amp to do so at a very low price, but for SS it's cheaper to just buy one already built. "This reminds me of Fred Willard's character in the excellent film, "A Mighty Wind". One of his catchphrases-"I Don't Think So!"-applies here." "I think Mr Slone is basically an electronics nerd who hates High End audio because it costs money and involves people who are trendy and fashionable and often buy it for pristege." Ad nauseum. Slone sucks! I think your opinion is both biased and ill informed. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Bret Ludwig" wrote in message oups.com Slone is a dildo who writes ****ty books on ****ty amp building. Really? From amazon.com reviews: "Of this entire book, thirty or forty pages at the very most are useful and then only if you want to build his amplifier. I'm not even an audio engineer and just looking at his schematics I can see where the Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs we all studied in the 70s and 80s show those designers learned things he hasn't." Some kind of armchair expert? Fool that I am I built examples of Bongiorno, Carver and Hafler designs. There was no magic. I've been told by co-workers at Dyna that Bongiourno was a drunk and a poser. Court records suggest that Carver is a poser who more recently has tried to support himself by litigating bogus patents. Hafler is the only one on this list who could be called the real thing, but at some point he stopped innovating. Unfortunately it was long before he stopped selling. "Unfortunately, for hobbyists and serious music reproduction fans, he's wrong. Circuits and parts do have sonic faults and attributes test sets, as useful and ingenious as they are, just can't address. Obviously, someone who believes in magic. Gas spectroscopy is an incredibly useful tool for science, but it's of little use in separating truly great wines from Thunderbird. These amps and associated circuits are perhaps not audio Thunderbird, but they're not a fine Chardonnay." The irony is that audio is about reproduction while wine-making is about both production and reproduction. The author has obviously confused the two. "As for all this "controversy" on tubes, the definitive source is indeed still Hamm's JAES paper, "Tubes vs. Transistors". An article that was an embarassment to the AES when it was published, and things only went downhill since then. That Slone doesn't cite it reveals that he just was too lazy to do his homework because it actually reinforced certain of his arguments, or too dense to perceive it. This paper has been reprinted so frequently that anyone interested will be able to find it easily." No, that Slone didn't cite Hamm shows that he has two or more brain cells to rub together. "Basically this whole book is the effort of a hayseed electronics vendor to peddle his own kits of plain vanilla grade stereo equipment. These days, plain vanilla stereo equipment is often really pretty good. ith skilled electronic assemblers in America getting $8.30/hr (and equally skilled Asians getting that per day!) and components in hobby quantities bringing a 50 to 500 percent premium over what commercial buyers pay even in 100 piece quantities, he claims a hobbyist can better commercial grade designs in his hobby workshop cheaper." How long has it been since Heathkit sacked their audio business? That was driven by the fact that assembled gear was becoming cheaper than a credible kit. It was as much about the decreasing cost of audio parts, as the decreasing cost of audio assembly, driven by automation as much if not more than by low labor costs in the Pacific rim. "This reminds me of Fred Willard's character in the excellent film, "A Mighty Wind". One of his catchphrases-"I Don't Think So!"-applies here." "I think Mr Slone is basically an electronics nerd who hates High End audio because it costs money and involves people who are trendy and fashionable and often buy it for pristege." Ah, the usual radical subjectivist reference to class warfare. Ad nauseum. Slone sucks! Someone needs to buy, beg or steal a much-needed clue. Trouble is, he won't find it in the high end. Don't sugar coat it Arny. What's your take on the idea that amps are responible for imaging? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
" wrote in
message What's your take on the idea that amps are responsible for imaging? Everybody with a brain knows that recordings and speakers are primarily responsible for imaging. Most perceptions that an amp affects imaging are based on: (1) A really bad amp. (2) Level match problems during the evaluation. If this isn't due to careless test setup, see (1). (3) Channel balance problems. If this isn't due to careless test setup, see (1). Unlike most of the golden ears that posture here, I've actually done straight wire bypass tests of a number of amps. I've only been following in the steps of audio greats like Peter Baxendall, Peter Walker, etc. If an amp was affecting imaging, it should be very apparent during a before-and-after comparison. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... " wrote in message What's your take on the idea that amps are responsible for imaging? Everybody with a brain knows that recordings and speakers are primarily responsible for imaging. Most perceptions that an amp affects imaging are based on: (1) A really bad amp. (2) Level match problems during the evaluation. If this isn't due to careless test setup, see (1). (3) Channel balance problems. If this isn't due to careless test setup, see (1). Unlike most of the golden ears that posture here, I've actually done straight wire bypass tests of a number of amps. I've only been following in the steps of audio greats like Peter Baxendall, Peter Walker, etc. If an amp was affecting imaging, it should be very apparent during a before-and-after comparison. I'm sure this will come as no surprise to our RAO "White Paper" team. We will need to round them up and take them back to Bizzaro world as soon as possible. IIRC there's an entrance in the basement of the Stereophile HQ. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... : " wrote in : message : : What's your take on the idea that amps are responsible for : imaging? : : Everybody with a brain knows that recordings and speakers : are primarily responsible for imaging. Most perceptions that : an amp affects imaging are based on: : : (1) A really bad amp. : (2) Level match problems during the evaluation. If this : isn't due to careless test setup, see (1). : (3) Channel balance problems. If this isn't due to careless : test setup, see (1). : : Unlike most of the golden ears that posture here, I've : actually done straight wire bypass tests of a number of : amps. I've only been following in the steps of audio greats : like Peter Baxendall, Peter Walker, etc. Baxendall ? You mean this guy ? : "sacked Dr Baxendall last September, but will be allowed to carry on practising under strict supervision" or is that american english ;-) R. Baxandall i presume : |