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.

Keep stumbling, Mikey. You are "special."
Try not to fall down.

"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.

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!

"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.

"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.

"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?

" 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.

"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.

"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
: