Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:35:17 -0500, Wink wrote:
I happened to snag a set of 63V/10,000ufd FK BG caps for my monoblock .....snip! ...stuff deleted Not much to go on here, but thought I would throw this one out to you guys. Thanks again... Dave You should check your amp with a square wave, at least several KHz, and determine if you are getting transient problems from capacitor/wiring series inductance and/or current loops inducing voltages in your circuitry. The first can be reduced by putting low-Z caps (1-10 uF polypropylene snubber types) across your rough supply. Location is critical. Should be close to the output devices. Minimize loops! The second effect can be reduced by limiting the loop area defined by your supply/output wiring. Large loops can induce voltages in other traces, and give you all kinds of weird artifacts. If your amp can slew very fast, this can be a problem. It can get bad enough to start oscillations, but in my experience it usually causes overshoot or ringing on a sqare wave. Your circuit board layout, and wiring to your caps can be a problem. Keep power supply leads, and capacitor leads adjacent so that much of the magnetic field is cancelled. Normally, in audio this isn't a big deal, but the output can run pretty high current at a high di/dt (rate of current change), and this can cause induced voltages in nearby wiring. One of the tests I run an amp through, is to inject a white noise signal hipassed at a cutoff of 20KHz. The filter is about 6th order. At zero to full power output, there should be no audible sound coming from your speakers (it's all above your hearing limit). Amplifiers that have problems will generate frying noises or other odd sounds. These usually are a result of excessive feedback causing distortion when the amp slews. The nice part of this test is you need no equipment other than the signal source and your own ears. There are a few tricks for placing compensation components in the circuit to reduce overload effects during transient conditions. They may reduce the bandwidth (of course, never below 20KHz), but will give your amp much better performance under difficult signals. I have A/B'd an amp that had this problem (A was the original, B was one modified to eliminate the transient distortion). To be honest, I couldn't tell the difference. It was blatantly obvious with a square wave and 'scope. So..... apart from your rather biased hearing tests (with a single amp, it is pretty well impossible to have a blind A/B test), have you made any measurements? Paul |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Regarding Cap voltage rating:
How many commercial designs use caps whose voltage rating is essentially equal to the Rail Voltage? Maybe many, or most. I doubt it. |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:13:07 GMT, Jerry Peters
wrote: Wink wrote: A glorious response. Curious in light of previous helpful and cordial ones, free of your compulsive cruelty. I'm not an objectivist Arny. I've tried to be, the scientist within compels it; but amps sound different, quite different frequently. ICs and cables: I've been a maximum skeptic for decades, using generics and zip cord. But recent experiments have shown that these items do indeed sound different, frequently meaningfully. It is distressing, looking for the physics, and the yet the conclusion is inescapable. I'm convinced that, though objectivists do not necessarily have inferior ears, they may have ears which are insensitive to things the subjectivists detect. Like my wife who can distinguish colors that look utterly the same to me. Actually there is a possible scientific explanation for this: a small number of women can actually see far more colors than the usual 16 million or so. I forget the details, but their retinal structure is actually different. Jerry Yes, of course. I don't think I've implied there isn't a scientific explanation for the color perception differential. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:05:26 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Jerry Peters wrote: Wink wrote: A glorious response. Curious in light of previous helpful and cordial ones, free of your compulsive cruelty. I'm not an objectivist Arny. I've tried to be, the scientist within compels it; but amps sound different, quite different frequently. ICs and cables: I've been a maximum skeptic for decades, using generics and zip cord. But recent experiments have shown that these items do indeed sound different, frequently meaningfully. It is distressing, looking for the physics, and the yet the conclusion is inescapable. I'm convinced that, though objectivists do not necessarily have inferior ears, they may have ears which are insensitive to things the subjectivists detect. Like my wife who can distinguish colors that look utterly the same to me. Actually there is a possible scientific explanation for this: a small number of women can actually see far more colors than the usual 16 million or so. I forget the details, but their retinal structure is actually different. Precisely. If you actually look in enough detail, you'll find the scientific exaplanation. The audio subjectivists don't even try looking though. They see and hear only what they want to believe. It's like a religion. Graham This may be true of some subjectivists, but surely there is a continuum. Give me the science every time, if it's been formulated. I use extension cord for cable. Perhaps that will glean some points. |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Yeah, but 'ordinary' capacitors for a few bucks each don't 'sound as good'. $200 caps--identical in every way, but for appearance and price tag--'sound' better...or so the OP would have us believe. No -- I've not claimed this. I've been a long BG skeptic but decided to roll the dice. Unusual for me. If they make no substantial improvement, I'll sell and move to something more conventional. I like Rod Elliott's idea of multiple paralleled smaller caps. I must say, I can't find an easy segue between corner rocks and wooden knobs to cap design. |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:35:17 -0500, Wink wrote:
I happened to snag a set of 63V/10,000ufd FK BG caps for my monoblock PSUs. The rail voltage with stock Hafler xmfr is ~ 63 Volts so to avoid exploding my $$ BGs, I'm using a Variac to reduce the AC mains input for a rail Voltage of ~ 53 volts until I replace the Hafler trafos with lower sec V Toroidals. [Refer to "Hafler Monoblock Project..." thread] The mystery is the sound, which is sort of peculiar. Hard to explain, but what is the source? Of course there are 3 variables that have been changed: PSU caps from Chemicons to BGs, lower rail voltage (well within the operating range of the PA-3D driver board), and inclusion of the Variac twixt house mains and both amps. Should I expect some odd interaction between the Variac and existing Hafler power xfmr? Nothing obvious comes to mind. Running stone cold, the 1500VA, Powerstat Variac has plenty of capacity. Not much to go on here, but thought I would throw this one out to you guys. Thanks again... Lots of posts, and I've skipped a lot because of the hostility factor, so please forgive if I'm redundant: First, don't worry too much about the Variac. It's just not the kind of thing that ya can hear easily. Yeah, it might make the loudest peak clip a dB sooner. Yeah, so what? It's loud; it's clipped; tell me something new. Like that. So, downstream of the main HV supplies, which feed the output stages directly, are regulators for the earlier stages. Have you confirmed that these regulators are being fed nourishing voltages? Forgive me if this seems too "basic", but this is Usenet, and all assumptions are chumptions, at this point. All good fortune, and please keep us updated, Chris Hornbeck |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 23:01:52 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: jakdedert wrote: Eeyore wrote: jakdedert wrote: Eeyore wrote: Wink wrote: Why did you change the caps? When the stock Hafler 10 kufd Sangamos started to die several years ago, I replaced them with Musical Concepts 80V, 27 kufd LC-200s made by Chemi-con, and noticed immediately a deadening of the sound. Duh.... Why the duh ? Duh = 'obvious'. If the caps were actually 'dying', then replacing them would improve the sound...same point you made below. 'Improve' depends on subjectivity. Make different for sure. It seems the OP felt it was inferior despite the fact, that's how the amps were designed. However his later comments make me think he may have disturbed something else if the sound really deteriorated badly. Graham No -- no large scale deterioration. Nothing was disturbed. The bass started to lose control on certain inputs at high spls. The rest of the spectrum seemed unaffected. It is curious, and it's been a while. I didn't document the failure scenario. |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
His later comments make me think he wouldn't know if his amp was bad or good. The only subjective measurement unit he's presented (beside ps voltage) is US Dollars ($). More$ = Better sound. Many more$ = Much Better Sound. jak No -- All I've described is that I acquired BG filter caps. Did you even read my posts, or is this simply a reflexive response? |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:14:57 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Wink wrote: Why does that not make sense to 'audiophiles'...and by what objective measurement were the originals starting to 'die'? Loss of bass control. Serious enough to be quite objective. I initially thought the surrounds on the woofers were coming unglued. That sounds like something more serious. Do you really know what you're doing poking around inside amps ? Nope, it was the caps. Changing them completely eliminated the problem. What ELSE did you touch (possibly inadvertantly). Well, I built the amps from kits almost 30 years ago, then applied Hillig's fairly complex GX mod in the late 80s. They worked perfectly for 20+ years as such. In the mean time I applied the Galo/Jung Pooge 5 mods to a Phillips DAC 960, built multiple line stages and speakers including ESLs, perforated and wire stator types. Seriously, if the OP wants to use those 'bargain' $800 caps, perhaps he should build an entire new pair of blocs with those and the new transformers he's having custom built...and sell the originals. There are plenty of plans on the Web. Of course it sounds like money is not an object, so perhaps he could use the old ones as doorstops. This is what I've done Jak, using John Hillig's driver cards. The caps and xmfrs are the final additions. All that remains of the original 220's are chassis, mosfets, and xfmrs. Why on earth are you wasting your time mucking about with an ancient amp ? Technology has moved on although I confess I have a soft spot for mosfet amps. When really well designed and set up they have miniscule (high order) crossover distortion compared to bipolars. Indeed one of my own mosfet designs had vanishingly low THD and most of what could be measured was 2nd harmonic which is sonically the least intrusive. Do you even read my posts? I've retained the 134/49 mosfet pairs, chassis, and xfmr. It isn't a Hafler anymore. No plans for bipolars, though I've ordered double current Exicons. Ancient amps: Have you heard a Marantz 8b, or a Futterman? The old Pass A-40 still sounds pretty good, better than his Aleph 30. |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. Neither does a used one in good shape with commodity power supply caps @ $10 each. That's brilliant Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. But audio isn't rocket science and it isn't high energy physics, either. Really? Explain. We've got all the answers we need to understand why things sound different. I hope that is the case. The trough job is getting true believers to do proper listening tests. Let the true believers believe, and continue with your pot metal ears. I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. Prove it. Can't, a perception. And I suspect you know this. Doesn't follow, Logically, you mean? Of course not. Another perception. |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:08:40 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Wink wrote: A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. We only have your word for that. When did you last hear one in *ORIGINAL* condition with PSU capacitors at their orignal value ? Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. In this instance science most certainly DOES have the answer. Of course, it frequently does. Your old caps had reduced capacitance through aging. That's why new ones of the correct originally specified value sounded different. That would be the case regardless of the brand name on the can. Yes, they would sound different regardless of "the brand name on the can". But would they sound moribund?? Are you just randonly typing? This is ridiculous. |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote:
I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. And I suspect you know this. I'm a pro-audio designer who's worked with some of the best in the busines and I'm something of an expert about amplifier design. Pro-Audio designer. Mmmmm.... Do you have a 30 db notch at 4 or 6 khz from noise induced hearing loss? Do you fancy the Benchmark DAC 1? |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:23:08 -0500, jakdedert
wrote: Wink wrote: A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. And I suspect you know this. I suspect you pay a lot of money for nothing. Probably you have a lot of money to spend on nothing. Fine. You just won't get much sympathy for snake-oil hawkers in a forum of objective audio (mostly) professionals. Objective audio pros: Exactly why I posted the original question here, and actually did get a few sound responses. Thanks to Mark, Dave and Kevin. You've taken the word (or falling for the BS...your choice) of people who are simply taking your money and laughing behind your back. You've no idea the decision making process that lead to the BG purchase. Then you come here and try to convince us that the Emperor's New Outfit is so exquisite Wrong. I've not said a word about how the BGs sound. Wait... yes I did: "Peculiar" in the original post, wrt to the Variac arrangement. Doesn't quite equate to "exquisite", does it? |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:00:37 GMT, dizzy wrote:
Eeyore wrote: wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. It's completely NUTS. Quite bizarre, to spend all that money on caps that are so incorrect that he thinks he needs variacs... From the original post: "...I'm using a Variac to reduce the AC mains input for a rail Voltage of ~ 53 volts until I replace the Hafler trafos with lower sec V Toroidals." It looks like 90% of you do not actually read posts. Instills a lot of confidence in your technical conclusions. |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:15:50 +0000, Eeyore
wrote: Wink wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. 63 V BGs were available for a deal, albeit a relative deal -- no question. 80 V versions are gone. This is the only reason I'm lowering the rail voltage. They'll be totally fine at 63V. At least you can then rule out bias variations caused by the lower voltage operation. Current flow in the main rails has not changed at all with the cap change and AC mains thus DC rails voltage reduction -- 355 ma at 63 - 53 volts. In fact, current (measured at the rails fuse point) starts to plateau noticebly around 60-70 Vac mains input. Are you thinking about more than current flow through the output devices, perhaps the biasing on driver board elements? Interesting if so, which did not occur to me. Dave |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:50:54 GMT, Paul wrote:
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:35:17 -0500, Wink wrote: I happened to snag a set of 63V/10,000ufd FK BG caps for my monoblock ....snip! ...stuff deleted Not much to go on here, but thought I would throw this one out to you guys. Thanks again... Dave You should check your amp with a square wave, at least several KHz, and determine if you are getting transient problems from capacitor/wiring series inductance and/or current loops inducing voltages in your circuitry. Yes, I did fairly extensive square wave testing with the Chemicons at 63 V, then BGs at 53 V. Amp was biased at 355 ma in both cases. The results were exactly the same, to the extent that my eye can resolve. Pix are actually posted in alt.binaries.pictures.misc with title "Monoblock squarewave". The results are normal. Some rounding at 10 khz, but others in this group who've seen them have pronounced the results as good. I think the rounding suggests a less than stellar slew rate. I should say at this point that I seem to have solved the "peculiar" sound problem: Speaker cables. Being monoblocks, I am able to use very short, ~ 10" 14# zip cord as cable, biwired. I switched those out for my "reference standard" 6 foot, 16# Lowes extension cord cables (bi-wired) and the problem dissappeared. A dramatic result, completely unanticipated. When a result is so unanticipated, I rate it as significant despite the lack of rigorous test methods. Using that Lowes cable, my BG equipped monoblocks and Clayton S-40 sound very similar. Perhaps I should have a scope look at those 2 cable configs. The first can be reduced by putting low-Z caps (1-10 uF polypropylene snubber types) across your rough supply. Location is critical. Should be close to the output devices. Minimize loops! The Musical Concepts driver cards are equipped with 470 ufd de-coupling caps close to the location you recommend. I will check for snubbers in this area. (I hope no one reads this but I'm also replacing those decouplers with 100 ufd BG FKs at the direction of John Hillig, who doesn't stock them btw.) Of course, I'm not seeing transients currently. I'll have to check this again for the sake of rigor. The waveform did show the expected damped ringing with 2.2 ufd across the 8 ohm resistive dummy load. The second effect can be reduced by limiting the loop area defined by your supply/output wiring. Large loops can induce voltages in other traces, and give you all kinds of weird artifacts. If your amp can slew very fast, this can be a problem. It can get bad enough to start oscillations, but in my experience it usually causes overshoot or ringing on a sqare wave. Your circuit board layout, and wiring to your caps can be a problem. Keep power supply leads, and capacitor leads adjacent so that much of the magnetic field is cancelled. Normally, in audio this isn't a big deal, but the output can run pretty high current at a high di/dt (rate of current change), and this can cause induced voltages in nearby wiring. Well I'm not seeing that ringing, but I'm still planning major reconfiguration and re-wiring once I get the Toroidal xfmrs. The current wiring config is very much like the stock Hafler, except missing one channel on each block. Very far from optimal. I was going to use Carol 14# tinned stranded for this, one of their better grades. One of the tests I run an amp through, is to inject a white noise signal hipassed at a cutoff of 20KHz. The filter is about 6th order. At zero to full power output, there should be no audible sound coming from your speakers (it's all above your hearing limit). Amplifiers that have problems will generate frying noises or other odd sounds. These usually are a result of excessive feedback causing distortion when the amp slews. The nice part of this test is you need no equipment other than the signal source and your own ears. This is very interesting Paul! I assume it is a line level filter. There are a few tricks for placing compensation components in the circuit to reduce overload effects during transient conditions. They may reduce the bandwidth (of course, never below 20KHz), but will give your amp much better performance under difficult signals. I have A/B'd an amp that had this problem (A was the original, B was one modified to eliminate the transient distortion). To be honest, I couldn't tell the difference. It was blatantly obvious with a square wave and 'scope. Wow...interesting again. No audible difference. Mmmm... So..... apart from your rather biased hearing tests (with a single amp, it is pretty well impossible to have a blind A/B test), have you made any measurements? Oh yes, clearly biased, but fairly evident. I think most guys here would have heard the oddity. But I changed speaker cables, and viola. I have a theory about why this is the case, but I've gone on a bit long here already. Dave Paul |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote: Eeyore wrote: jakdedert wrote: Eeyore wrote: jakdedert wrote: Eeyore wrote: Wink wrote: Why did you change the caps? When the stock Hafler 10 kufd Sangamos started to die several years ago, I replaced them with Musical Concepts 80V, 27 kufd LC-200s made by Chemi-con, and noticed immediately a deadening of the sound. Duh.... Why the duh ? Duh = 'obvious'. If the caps were actually 'dying', then replacing them would improve the sound...same point you made below. 'Improve' depends on subjectivity. Make different for sure. It seems the OP felt it was inferior despite the fact, that's how the amps were designed. However his later comments make me think he may have disturbed something else if the sound really deteriorated badly. No -- no large scale deterioration. Nothing was disturbed. The bass started to lose control on certain inputs at high spls. The rest of the spectrum seemed unaffected. It is curious, and it's been a while. I didn't document the failure scenario. Hi 'Wink'. I'm pleased to see I haven't incurred your wrath with my 'anti-subjectivist' comments. The scenario you describe i.e at high SPL, correlates exactly with the predictable change in clipping behaviour that one would experience with different VALUE capacitors (i.e the new ones are back to stock original design value as opposed to the old ones which had lost their value). Old electrolytic caps lose their value as the electrolyte dries out btw. Their ESR also increases which may conceivably also have a measurable / audible effect. Graham |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote: Eeyore wrote: Wink wrote: A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. We only have your word for that. When did you last hear one in *ORIGINAL* condition with PSU capacitors at their orignal value ? Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. In this instance science most certainly DOES have the answer. Of course, it frequently does. If it DOESN'T, there's a problem or a misapprehension somewhere !!! Realising this fundamental truth and working things through has led me to learn some interesting things about some aspects of circuit behaviour that 'common sense' or 'popular lore' would have you believe were due to things that are in fact utterly irrelevant. Your old caps had reduced capacitance through aging. That's why new ones of the correct originally specified value sounded different. That would be the case regardless of the brand name on the can. Yes, they would sound different regardless of "the brand name on the can". But would they sound moribund?? Are you just randonly typing? This is ridiculous. What I'm saying is that any two (20% tolerance for example) caps selected at random of any specific value may differ in value by as much as 50%. That's enough to ensure that sonic differences may result in some circuits. Of course if the subjectivist hears this difference when fitting their new 'magick component' they will tend to beleive it's because of the magick because they've been told to believe that over a scientific explanation. As to sounding 'moribund', how can you say this when as you say it's at high SPL and presumably clipping. This is not a sensible test regime for any piece of kit. I have in the past looked at the technical construction aspect of BGs and can find nothing there whatever that would improve the performance of a power supply. Graham |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote: Wink wrote: I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. And I suspect you know this. I'm a pro-audio designer who's worked with some of the best in the busines and I'm something of an expert about amplifier design. Pro-Audio designer. Mmmmm.... Do you have a 30 db notch at 4 or 6 khz from noise induced hearing loss? Absolutely not. Designers don't typically expose themselves to the high SPLs that might do that. As it happens I have done some live sound engineering but I'm careful about my exposure. Do you fancy the Benchmark DAC 1? I haven't heard one but my recent experience is that all ** decent ** modern DACS are essentially indistinguishable. Obviously not those in a $29 DVD player of course. Graham |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote: Eeyore wrote: Wink wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. 63 V BGs were available for a deal, albeit a relative deal -- no question. 80 V versions are gone. This is the only reason I'm lowering the rail voltage. They'll be totally fine at 63V. At least you can then rule out bias variations caused by the lower voltage operation. Current flow in the main rails has not changed at all with the cap change and AC mains thus DC rails voltage reduction -- 355 ma at 63 - 53 volts. In fact, current (measured at the rails fuse point) starts to plateau noticebly around 60-70 Vac mains input. OK, that's fine but you've reduced your headroom by a few dB. That would seem to be a likely culprit. Are you thinking about more than current flow through the output devices, perhaps the biasing on driver board elements? Interesting if so, which did not occur to me. Both the biasing of the output devices themselves AND the driver / voltage gain stages. Graham |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Wink wrote: I should say at this point that I seem to have solved the "peculiar" sound problem: Speaker cables. Being monoblocks, I am able to use very short, ~ 10" 14# zip cord as cable, biwired. I switched those out for my "reference standard" 6 foot, 16# Lowes extension cord cables (bi-wired) and the problem dissappeared. A dramatic result, completely unanticipated. When a result is so unanticipated, I rate it as significant despite the lack of rigorous test methods. Looks like your speakers prefer being driven from a slightly higher impedance than can be achieved with short wiring. Graham |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
news On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:05:26 +0000, Eeyore wrote: Jerry Peters wrote: Wink wrote: A glorious response. Curious in light of previous helpful and cordial ones, free of your compulsive cruelty. I'm not an objectivist Arny. I've tried to be, the scientist within compels it; but amps sound different, quite different frequently. ICs and cables: I've been a maximum skeptic for decades, using generics and zip cord. But recent experiments have shown that these items do indeed sound different, frequently meaningfully. It is distressing, looking for the physics, and the yet the conclusion is inescapable. I'm convinced that, though objectivists do not necessarily have inferior ears, they may have ears which are insensitive to things the subjectivists detect. Like my wife who can distinguish colors that look utterly the same to me. Actually there is a possible scientific explanation for this: a small number of women can actually see far more colors than the usual 16 million or so. I forget the details, but their retinal structure is actually different. Precisely. If you actually look in enough detail, you'll find the scientific exaplanation. The audio subjectivists don't even try looking though. They see and hear only what they want to believe. It's like a religion. This may be true of some subjectivists, but surely there is a continuum. Sure, and I'm a subjectivist on that continuum. If you study up on the meaning of subjectivist, its not what the high end audio crowd make it out to be. In fact subjectivism and objectivism are not necessarily mutually exclusive, no matter what the high end high priests want people to believe. I had a lot of fun with the standard definitions of objectivism and subjectivism at HE2005. Anybody who actually listened and believed the standard definitions, started out knowing that I was debating a posturer, and not someone who appeals to reason and knowlege. Give me the science every time, if it's been formulated. All results of scientific investigation are provisional, until we get the next generation of improved results. Thing is, this golden capacitor weirdness has been around for about 30 years, and its just as false today as it was 30 years ago. I use extension cord for cable. Perhaps that will glean some points. It's not about points, its about gettting the best possible results given available resources. The ultimate non-negotiable resource is calendar time, with money running a close second. As this thread tells me, the exotic caps are wasting both. |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
His later comments make me think he wouldn't know if his amp was bad or good. The only subjective measurement unit he's presented (beside ps voltage) is US Dollars ($). More$ = Better sound. Many more$ = Much Better Sound. jak No -- All I've described is that I acquired BG filter caps. Did you even read my posts, or is this simply a reflexive response? I doubt it - but buying the BGs was obviously some kind of poorly throught-out exercise. |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Wink wrote: Why does that not make sense to 'audiophiles'...and by what objective measurement were the originals starting to 'die'? Loss of bass control. Serious enough to be quite objective. I initially thought the surrounds on the woofers were coming unglued. That sounds like something more serious. Do you really know what you're doing poking around inside amps ? What ELSE did you touch (possibly inadvertantly). Time to study up on the new golden driver cards, no? Google on John Hillig... |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. Neither does a used one in good shape with commodity power supply caps @ $10 each. That's brilliant Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. But audio isn't rocket science and it isn't high energy physics, either. Really? Explain. We've got all the answers we need to understand why things sound different. I hope that is the case. The trough job is getting true believers to do proper listening tests. Let the true believers believe, and continue with your pot metal ears. Yup, the prerequisite radical naive subjectivist personal attack. I've been posting to Usenet for over 12 years and some things don't change. I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. Prove it. Can't, a perception. Solipsim noted. And I suspect you know this. Doesn't follow, Logically, you mean? Of course not. Another perception. More solipsism. Shame. |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:23:08 -0500, jakdedert wrote: Wink wrote: A new stock DH-200 or 220 doesn't sound dead. Science has the potential to have all the answers. It doesn't follow that is has all the answers currently. I think YOU think you know what you're talking about, but really don't. And I suspect you know this. I suspect you pay a lot of money for nothing. Probably you have a lot of money to spend on nothing. Fine. You just won't get much sympathy for snake-oil hawkers in a forum of objective audio (mostly) professionals. ] Objective audio pros: Exactly why I posted the original question here, and actually did get a few sound responses. Thanks to Mark, Dave and Kevin. Nahh, Dave said "just a guess". Kevin was presuming a badly designed power amp. And Mark said that "It ought to work fine", which is basically what the rest of us are saying, only we're giving you more details about *why* it should work fine. You've taken the word (or falling for the BS...your choice) of people who are simply taking your money and laughing behind your back. You've no idea the decision making process that lead to the BG purchase. Whatever it was, science and generally accepted reasoning had nothing to do with it. Then you come here and try to convince us that the Emperor's New Outfit is so exquisite That would be the BlackGate hyper-capacitors. Money sinks for people who are unclear about audio technology. Wrong. I've not said a word about how the BGs sound. There's really nothing to say - in a circuit like the Hafler, just about any reasonble cap will sound identically the same. Wait... yes I did: "Peculiar" in the original post, wrt to the Variac arrangement. Doesn't quite equate to "exquisite", does it? Vague adjective time. Yawn. |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"dizzy" wrote in message
Eeyore wrote: wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. It's completely NUTS. Quite bizarre, to spend all that money on caps that are so incorrect that he thinks he needs variacs... Indeed. |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Wink wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. 63 V BGs were available for a deal, albeit a relative deal -- no question. 80 V versions are gone. This is the only reason I'm lowering the rail voltage. They'll be totally fine at 63V. At least you can then rule out bias variations caused by the lower voltage operation. I don't think so - given the highly imprecise methodology he's using to evaluate performance. |
#69
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Wink wrote: I should say at this point that I seem to have solved the "peculiar" sound problem: Speaker cables. Being monoblocks, I am able to use very short, ~ 10" 14# zip cord as cable, biwired. I switched those out for my "reference standard" 6 foot, 16# Lowes extension cord cables (bi-wired) and the problem dissappeared. A dramatic result, completely unanticipated. When a result is so unanticipated, I rate it as significant despite the lack of rigorous test methods. Looks like your speakers prefer being driven from a slightly higher impedance than can be achieved with short wiring. Nahh, the application of additional snake oil audio cables rectified his concerns. |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:00:37 GMT, dizzy wrote: Eeyore wrote: wrote: Seems like a whole lot of time, effort, and money being spent to run a lower output stage voltage. To each his own. It's completely NUTS. Quite bizarre, to spend all that money on caps that are so incorrect that he thinks he needs variacs... From the original post: "...I'm using a Variac to reduce the AC mains input for a rail Voltage of ~ 53 volts until I replace the Hafler trafos with lower sec V Toroidals." It looks like 90% of you do not actually read posts. You're splitting hairs, Winky. Just because he didn't recite your complete plan doesn't mean that he didn't read and comprehend it. It's obvious Winky that you are desperate to find any fault with the people who disagree with you. Instills a lot of confidence in your technical conclusions. I have yet to see even one technical conclusion from you, Winky. |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
In article , Wink wrote:
I happened to snag a set of 63V/10,000ufd FK BG caps for my monoblock PSUs. The rail voltage with stock Hafler xmfr is ~ 63 Volts so to avoid exploding my $$ BGs, I'm using a Variac to reduce the AC mains input for a rail Voltage of ~ 53 volts until I replace the Hafler trafos with lower sec V Toroidals. [Refer to "Hafler Monoblock Project..." thread] The mystery is the sound, which is sort of peculiar. Hard to explain, but what is the source? Of course there are 3 variables that have been changed: PSU caps from Chemicons to BGs, lower rail voltage (well within the operating range of the PA-3D driver board), and inclusion of the Variac twixt house mains and both amps. Should I expect some odd interaction between the Variac and existing Hafler power xfmr? Nothing obvious comes to mind. Running stone cold, the 1500VA, Powerstat Variac has plenty of capacity. Not much to go on here, but thought I would throw this one out to you guys. Thanks again... Dave I like putting a buch of car batteries up for the rails. Its really rock solid sound. Here is all about BG.. http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/blackgate/bgmain.htm greg |
#72
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"GregS" wrote in message
Here is all about BG.. http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/blackgate/bgmain.htm What a crock! http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/blackgate/bgtech.htm "Graphite fine particles have realized tunnel effect and turned ion transfer of a slow move into Transcendence Electron Transfer of a super high speed move by releasing electrons from ion's restriction" "Among electronic parts, electrolytic capacitors are the worst cause of noise" " In short, three major problems exist for electronic equipment using electrolytic capacitors: 1. Signals have ion distortion noise, lowering the S/N ratio. This results in a substantial lowering of the volume of the signal information. 2. The phase (frequency) of signals is delayed, seriously affecting color phase and digital pulse signals. 3. The power transfer efficiency does not match the increased level of the signals. " http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/bl...e/techEcap.htm "Super E-Caps is the ideal Capacitor solving a number of problems such as an electron transfer, distortion, non-polarity, durability, internal resonance etc." "Ordinarily, when the electrons flow through common conductors such as an electrolyte, a manganese dioxide, an organic semiconductor and so on, non-linear distortions generate corresponding to each conductor (average -100db) as shown in Figure 1 which indicates distortion characteristics." "An electrolytic capacitor, consisting a rolled pair of aluminum electrodes set face to face, forms a specific resonance frequency between the inductance L element of the electrodes and its self capacitance. In this type of capacitor, it is impossible to eliminate resonance. Normally the resonance frequency is about 200KHz at 100 µF, about 70KHz at I000µF, and about 35KHz at 2200µF. These values apply almost equally to capacitors of the same capacitance per area, whether polarized or non-polarized." http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/bl...chreport89.htm "Unconventional BG-WK POWER TANK is born: suppresses noise completely! " "A lot kind of electronic equipment which handles with pulse such as a television has a cathode ray tube imaging display device inside. Without exception, it has a horizontal fly back circuit for an electron-beam deflection of fairly large voltage. In fact, this is the biggest source of noise generation. The noise invades other numerous circuits connected with a same power supply directly, and self interference occurs inside because the noise is unexpectedly larger than that of coming from outside." Blahh, blahh, blahh. :-( |
#73
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Arny Krueger wrote: "GregS" wrote Here is all about BG.. http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/blackgate/bgmain.htm What a crock! http://www.acoustic-dimension.com/blackgate/bgtech.htm "Graphite fine particles have realized tunnel effect and turned ion transfer of a slow move into Transcendence Electron Transfer of a super high speed move by releasing electrons from ion's restriction" Pure gobbledegook. "Among electronic parts, electrolytic capacitors are the worst cause of noise" TOTALLY untrue. The worst causes of noise are high value resistros and active amplifying devices. "In short, three major problems exist for electronic equipment using electrolytic capacitors: 1. Signals have ion distortion noise, lowering the S/N ratio. This results in a substantial lowering of the volume of the signal information. 2. The phase (frequency) of signals is delayed, seriously affecting color phase and digital pulse signals. 3. The power transfer efficiency does not match the increased level of the signals. " Utter complete and total undiluted GARBAGE. Pure pseudo-science using made-up words in fact with the emphasis on 'pseud' ! Enough said. Graham |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
No -- no large scale deterioration. Nothing was disturbed. The bass
started to lose control on certain inputs at high spls. The rest of the spectrum seemed unaffected. It is curious, and it's been a while. I didn't document the failure scenario. Hi 'Wink'. I'm pleased to see I haven't incurred your wrath with my 'anti-subjectivist' comments. The scenario you describe i.e at high SPL, correlates exactly with the predictable change in clipping behaviour that one would experience with different VALUE capacitors (i.e the new ones are back to stock original design value as opposed to the old ones which had lost their value). Old electrolytic caps lose their value as the electrolyte dries out btw. Their ESR also increases which may conceivably also have a measurable / audible effect. Graham I'm not really a subjectivist, more of an Objectivist with occasional Subjectivist sympathies. In any case, all my wrath was incurred long ago. None left. I extracted all 4 old Sangamos from basement hell. Recall I have a 220 and 200. (I usually just say I have 2 - 220s to avoid tedium, like I'm engaging in now.) They were pulled in Feb '05. 2 marked "work, but questionable". The other 2, "Bad". WBQ 1 - 9700 ufd WBQ 2 - 8000 ufd BAD 1 - 7800 ufd BAD 2 - 0.0082 ufd -- this one rattles What to make of it? The story is actually more complicated than originally reported. I was bi-amping at the time, using BW303s ($250/pr) and diy subs. The subs were spitting out the nasties so it must have been that amp that keeled over and I simply decided to replace all caps in both amps. I don't know if the 3 still showing viable values should be reformed before measurement. I doubt it, I think those values are probably within tolerance, whatever that is. You'd certainly expect something obnoxious from the rattler, severe 120 hz hum minimally. That wasn't the case. I was getting sporadic spitting and popping as well, if I recall correctly. It would be interesting to press the 2 - WBQs back into service for a listen but am not crazy about the idea. I don't recall why I have them marked "...But Questionable". Sometime after cap replacement, I eventually lost 3 of the 4 total channels, so other things may have been brewing. I'll stop here lest I put you into a coma. Dave (Wink) |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
Let the true believers believe, and continue with your pot metal ears. Yup, the prerequisite radical naive subjectivist personal attack. You mean requisite. I've been posting to Usenet for over 12 years and some things don't change. 12 years -- very impressive. Can't, a perception. Solipsim noted. SolipsiSm. Incorrectly used, but at least your spelling is close. I'm beginning to think you're a fraud Arny. You seem nervous. I'm not nervious - I'm too relaxed to worry about yet another disciple of Walt Jung who thinks he has all the answers. Correct my casual spelling and make a big problem out of it if you will... Your nit-picking proves to me that I was right to not bother check the spelling of the word because you'll grab onto any nit, no matter how small, to avoid getting the truth about the pseudo-science that you have bought into, hook, line, and golden capacitor. |
#76
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
"Wink" wrote in message
news Wrong. I've not said a word about how the BGs sound. There's really nothing to say - in a circuit like the Hafler, just about any reasonble cap will sound identically the same. "....sound identically the same." Ouch. You can't improve on sonically transparent, which the stock Haflers are. Well anyway, All of this is simply a source of amusement for you, obviously. I'm not using the original PC19 driver card. I figured this out. I'm very sure that the Hafler stock PC19 card is intelligently designed. I've heard many times with my own ears how nicely they work. You're increasing smallness has become exhausting. I'm kinda interested in hearing how Hillig peed in the PC19 soup and according to you, ruined their ability to work with slightly low power supply voltages. I have the schematic of the origional PC19 here on the screen... |
#77
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:25:31 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: "Wink" wrote in message His later comments make me think he wouldn't know if his amp was bad or good. The only subjective measurement unit he's presented (beside ps voltage) is US Dollars ($). More$ = Better sound. Many more$ = Much Better Sound. jak No -- All I've described is that I acquired BG filter caps. Did you even read my posts, or is this simply a reflexive response? I doubt it - but buying the BGs was obviously some kind of poorly throught-out exercise. Well--possibly. I spent an eternity searching for more conventionally priced caps. I was quite ready to install some decent comp grade screw tops. You supplied a Panasonic link, which are almost certainly splendid. I talked to quite a few industry folks, none of whom sell them. I do not recall such incredible wide-spread enthusiasm over a single passive component like we've seen with the BGs. Of course, history records many such mass reactions to bad ideas. But it was actually Martin Colloms articles that pushed me over the edge. It is a rare caprice for me. My total system cost even with the BGs is probably less than 2500 bucks. There is a lot of diy in there, including my speakers. My hope is that I can sell them without monumental loss should they not perform at least superbly. The current demand verges on the absurd. Should I report back that indeed the poorly thought out exercise was exactly that, I'm sure your vindication will be joyous Arny. I certainly hope so. Dave |
#78
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote: Wrong. I've not said a word about how the BGs sound. There's really nothing to say - in a circuit like the Hafler, just about any reasonble cap will sound identically the same. "....sound identically the same." Ouch. You can't improve on sonically transparent, which the stock Haflers are. This exchange reminds me of a very perceptive editorial in IAR some years ago. The writer opined that many of the audiophile-oriented equipment reviewers were praising certain audio components, for behaviors that they should have been condemning. The specific example was DAC boxes. Certain (expensive) DAC boxes were being praised for being very "revealing" - they would "reveal" differences between the qualities of the CD transports with which they were being used. That's actually a *bad* thing, as it indicates that the DAC-box is reacting to aspects of the S/PDIF digital signal (e.g. timing-jitter spectrum) that it *should* be ignoring. A DAC-box with more robust clock-signal recovery circuitry would always sound the same (i.e. at its best) when used with *any* CD transport that was delivering a bit-correct digital data stream, and would not need an outboard "jitter reduction" reclocker. It seems to me that an amplifier circuit which is sensitive to the brand (or e.g. slight ESR or value variations) of its power-supply reservoir capacitors is, likewise, overly sensitive to things that it really shouldn't "notice". -- Dave Platt AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
#79
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Time to study up on the new golden driver cards, no? Google on John Hillig... Golden driver cards? Explain. The only notable thing a Google search reveals about John aside from generally positive audio commentary is that his mother died last week, but I knew this before seeing the obit. I worship at the alter of John Hillig. This is what you assume of course. Well -- It is true, I do. |
#80
Posted to rec.audio.tech
|
|||
|
|||
Effect of Variac on Monoblocks
Let the true believers believe, and continue with your
pot metal ears. Yup, the prerequisite radical naive subjectivist personal attack. You mean requisite. I've been posting to Usenet for over 12 years and some things don't change. 12 years -- very impressive. Can't, a perception. Solipsim noted. SolipsiSm. Incorrectly used, but at least your spelling is close. I'm beginning to think you're a fraud Arny. You seem nervous. And I suspect you know this. Doesn't follow, Logically, you mean? Of course not. Another perception. More solipsism. Shame. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Variac as a Troubleshooting Aid | Vacuum Tubes | |||
fa jefferson variac | Marketplace | |||
Variac and New Amp | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Variac | Vacuum Tubes | |||
Variac | Vacuum Tubes |