Jump to content

george wright sound 3.5 mono blocks


robertod

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

Why not have a discussion on the unusual audio design ideas I have put forth ?   Never once have we two had a good technical discussion on these, and you are a tube amp designer !!!  

 

It seems to me that a characteristic feature of your posts is that you shy away from anyone's attempt to engage you in technical discussions that challenge your assertions.  For example, a while back in your Dyanaco preamp thread some questions were raised about your use of the term "transfer efficiency" in the context of different choices of power cord.  I presented some estimates showing that any difference in power transferred from the wall socket to the amplifier when using a 12 AWG Mil. Spec. wire as opposed to cheap zip cord was completely dwarfed by day-to-day or hour-to-hour variations in the voltage supplied by the local electricity company.  Instead of showing a willingness to engage in a technical discussion to back up your assertions, you simply responded by asserting

 

"I am not going to enter into any technical discussions with you.  There is a lot that technical people THINK they know, but do not know at all.  It is hilarious to me, how much educated people, who can not think out of the box, get goofed-up in audio, and I find they also often have crummy sounding home audio systems.   Have a great day."

 

This kind of reply is pretty much your stock response to more or less anyone who has some technical knowledge and who tries to challenge you on one of your "technical" assertions.  I can well understand why Maynard would be sceptical that anything would go differently in any further attempts he might have to discuss technical matters with you.

 

 

Edited by Backfire
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A question I have is respectfully,

how much of your work is what could be called experimental, and more generally be called settled science?

It may be the case that you are going with some or all of the principals as presented by your

aforementioned mentor as guidance of your builds. And or, at some point, you may go on a different path, as part of the natural progression in discovery, vis a vis, any error over periods of the all too real, fulness of time.

Not an inquiry by the Spanish court, yet abit curious Mr. Medwin.

Thanks! 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

Respectfully, a typical E.E., does not have enough of an imagination, to grasp what I promote as being worthwhile. 

 

It's not respectful. It's insulting to EEs and self-aggrandizing to you.

 

Quote

Your rigid training, gets in the way of you understanding and trying out things. 

 

Some of us EEs are not typical and not afraid to try out things. Some of us have a career full of inventions and patents to prove it. And some of us would like to see evidence in support of your claims of knowledge that only you and a few "chosen ones" can and do possess.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

 

That's not evidence. That's opinion. I would like to see an explanation for how and why these unconventional approaches are superior. If they are better, then there has to be an explanation for it that does not involve magic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

 

Thank you, @Jeffrey D. Medwin. I haven't read through the whole document, yet, but in the very first post by John Swenson I find the following:

 

"Then I started playing around with PSUD with a small stepped current rsponse and tried modeling the different snubbers I'd been trying. What I found was the filters I'd been using were under damped, they "rang" when a transient hit, the snubbers were exacerbating the ringing (it was already there but not as bad). The situations with the most awful HF problems were the ones with the greatest ringing of the filter. Aha, I'm on to something!!"

 

In later posts I find references to critical damping, step response of the power supply, etc. Jeffrey, these are absolutely mainstream EE concepts, adequately understood and explained by traditional circuit models. There is nothing magical about any of it, and a "typical" EE will understand it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

Read both Swenson and Hasquin .............. fully.

 

I will when I have time.

 

Quote

Your first posted response was disappointing, as to what you have put into this.

 

As spoken in The Princess Bride, "Get used to disappointment." I'm not here to please you.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 8/19/2020 at 10:22 AM, babadono said:

Here is the link to the whole enchilada document:

https://centralindianaaes.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/indy-aes-2012-seminar-w-notes-v1-0.pdf

The concise troubleshooting guide can be found at Jensen Transformer website.*

 

 

*  = the best audio transformers made:)  No affiliation actual or implied.

That's brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeffrey, I’m going to need to see some science which supports many of your recommendations.  Let’s start with your belief that using multiple resistors in parallel is better than using a single resistor.   Why will that make an amp sound better, and why do they have to be matched so closely?  I will have many other questions as this proceeds.  
 

 

Maynard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tube fanatic said:

Let’s start with your belief that using multiple resistors in parallel is better than using a single resistor.   Why will that make an amp sound better, and why do they have to be matched so closely?

If the resistors are the same type i.e. metal film, wire wound etc... then this is definitely a case of perception bias. i.e. you want to believe that this will change how it sounds so you convince yourself(your auditory cortex) that you hear a difference. As the old man said "it won't make a dimes worth of difference"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, babadono said:

If the resistors are the same type i.e. metal film, wire wound etc... then this is definitely a case of perception bias. i.e. you want to believe that this will change how it sounds so you convince yourself(your auditory cortex) that you hear a difference. As the old man said "it won't make a dimes worth of difference"


Of course!  We know this.  I want Jeffrey to explain why he believes his assertion to be true.  I am also confused by some of his recommendations which presumably are meant for hum reduction.  Yet, he insists that some hum is needed for music to sound good.  I look forward to reading his responses.

 

 

Maynard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

Not everything is pure science Maynard, nor can all things existing be explained today in scientific terms. !!!  

 

To answer your other question, the need for precise matching is pretty rudimentary.  Our ears hear unmatched paralleled resistors as a SKEW in the music, as they are not equal to each other.  It will sound inferior, because " one is always fighting the other " so to speak. We can hear that Maynard.  It is " funky " sounding, compared the NO " fighting", or just one resistor in that circuit location.    Particularly, it becomes audible in the better executed SE amps,.... readily evident.   The less differences in resistances between the two resistors in parallel, the better, the less skewed, the final result will be.  I suggest 0.1% or better matching.  It is audibly superior to 01%.

 

 


This is where we definitely part ways!  Resistors in parallel do not “fight” one another as the voltage across them is identical.  It does not matter if you use 50 in parallel- the voltage across each is the same.  As a plate load for a voltage amplifier, the tube will not know if you use a single 100k resistor, two 200k resistors in parallel, or 500k in parallel with 125k.  The dc plate voltage and ac signal voltage will be identical.  I, and every amp designer or builder I know, cannot hear the phenomenon you describe.  And we have tried this many times to determine if what you are saying is real.  Have you ever evaluated your concept blind?  If not, have a trusted friend do some changes for you to determine if what you perceive is real, or wishful thinking.  Further, what is the advantage of using resistor wattages vastly greater than what is needed?

 

What is a “skew” in the music?
 

 

Maynard

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, tube fanatic said:

Resistors in parallel do not “fight” one another as the voltage across them is identical.  It does not matter if you use 50 in parallel- the voltage across each is the same.  As a plate load for a voltage amplifier, the tube will not know if you use a single 100k resistor, two 200k resistors in parallel, or 500k in parallel with 125k.

 

In an attempt to give the concept the benefit of the doubt, I calculated the capacitance of two parallel wires (proxies for parallel resistors) separated by millimeters. It's in the single picoFarad (10-12 F) range ... in a context of microFarads (10-6 F). I'm gonna need a little more convincing.

 

Quote

 What is a “skew” in the music?

 

I was wondering the same thing. If I know exactly what it is, then perhaps I can listen for it myself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

  A skew in the music can occur when you change any part, and the music presentation sounds worse, typically slightly disjointed, not " together ". 

 

The advantage of two resistors, matched, over one, is audible to me.  Maybe you need to hear this with the best sounding resistors to start with, so you can begin to hear things. You say there are no differences, and I find just the opposite to be true .   Mills MR-200s or Roderstein Rasista MK8s are two great ones.

 

If you are comparing a single muddy-sounding resistor to two muddy sounding resistors, you will not be able to tell such things.  That is likely the problem, and I do not doubt your report to us, one iota .

 

Jeff .  

Then reads like utter nonsense to most, but I can hear the differences in resistors, capacitors,  chokes, tubes and a variety of other parts.

 

For $29.99 + S&H I will send anyone who wants it my list of the best sounding parts. If you act now I will throw in a free surprise gift. This is simply ti help defray costs I have incurred over the years in finding the best sounding parts and materials.

 

My list has been developed over the last 55 years, with very, very careful documentation. To date I have made well over 100,000 comparisons which I have detailed in logbooks and spreadsheets. Each comparison documents 20 different criterion I have developed to hone in on the true perfect part. In most cases I list 3 options, a top "money no object" choice, a middle priced option and a low cost alternative. 

 

I also include charts to show which parts work best with other parts, including my Never Mix Master list that contains over 1,000 examples of normally great sounding parts causing equipment to become virtually unlistenable when combined with certain other parts.

 

In my research I have found that in over 98% of the amps, preamps, phone preamps and other equipment one or more of these combinations that rob you of hi fidelity. 

 

I'm currently doing random, controlled experimentation on cable and power cord lengths using data I purchased from an auction of old long forgotten Bell lab experiments that took place in the 30s to 50s. I am adding to that wealth of data and honing in on the one true universal length power cord and I/C. Details to follow.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1993 I interviewed with what was then Crystal Semiconductor. At that time there was a raging argument over digital interconnects. Subjectivists were adamant that wired S/PDIF sounded better than optical Toslink, and balanced AES/EBU sounded best of the three. Objectivists were adamant that all three interfaces transmitted all of the bits with 100% accuracy, so there was no way that they could sound different.

 

The interviewer asked me what I thought of the argument. "Well," I said. "As an engineer I know that the bits are being transferred correctly. But as an audiophile I know what I hear, and I hear differences. I cannot explain them, but I can hear them."

 

"Bits are bits," replied the interviewer. "You're full of :pwk_bs:."

 

Yes, he actually said that. Needless to say, it ended the interview.

 

It took some time, but eventually it was found that the bit clock derived from the three interfaces differed significantly. AES/EBU was best, followed by wired S/PDIF, followed by Toslink. The audiophiles were correct.

 

So I am open to the possibility that components can sound different. But I want to hear it for myself, and once heard, I want a scientific explanation for it. Anything less really is :pwk_bs:.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

The advantage of two resistors, matched, over one, is audible to me. 

 

Jeff .  

 

Taking this, and some of your other assertions, at face value, you must surely admit that by many people's standards they are extraordinary claims.  It is therefore reasonable to ask for proof of extraordinary solidity. Knowing, as we do, that the human ear and mind, as with other senses, can easily be deceived, the surest way of being certain that the claimed effect is genuine is to carry out double blind listening tests.

 

You spoke, for example, of hearing a "disgusting skew" if L1 and L2 in an L1/C1/L2/C2 power supply were unmatched.  That sounds like something that it would therefore be very easy for you to demonstrate as audible (to you), if you were to take part in properly controlled double-blind listening tests.  You are not talking about a tiny, subtle effect; you are talking about something that "sounds disgusting" to you if there is a mismatch. It should be incredibly easy for you to demonstrate that you really are hearing that, and that it is not a result of some expectation bias on your part.

 

When you think of all the years you have probably spent arguing with the many people who don't believe your claims, and the fact that it seems to be very important to you for people to believe the claims you make, it would be relatively easy for you to produce quite compelling supporting evidence by taking part in a rigorously-controlled double-blind listening test.  Maybe consider doing something like that?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, Edgar said:

So I am open to the possibility that components can sound different. But I want to hear it for myself, and once heard, I want a scientific explanation for it. Anything less really is :pwk_bs:

Is that a "no" on my comparison list? I really can hear the differences. I can take out all of the guesswork. 

 

All you need to do is trust me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jeffrey D. Medwin said:

 

 

I have this great sounding KT88 amp that is almost unusable, to hear at its best .  Why?  Too much gain.  The Volume Control feeding it needs to right now be set at about 6:30, rather than 3 O'Clock, and MOST of the source signal is getting shunted to ground. Additionally, if the Volume Control can be at 3 o'clock, the interconnect cable, going to the amp, will be operating at a much better, higher level of drive ( to the cable! ).   So, do you see the two edged sword here ??

 

In 2019, we just much - misjudged the gain of a KT88 tetrode, operating as a tetrode, ( with it's separate G2 supply  ) - and without using any negative feedback, as everyone else on this planet does it. Thanks for posting.

 

Jeff


 

Jeffrey, I am surprised you are discussing your amp in a thread about George Wright’s amp.  
 

I am confused!  When evaluated at Dennis’ house you and the others concluded that your KT88 amp sounded better than any amp in existence (including Dennis’ SET).  So how did it go from that to almost unusable to hear at its best?  Also, why does a cable need to be operated at a “higher level of drive” to sound its  best?  Are you saying that a cable performs better at the 2 volt RMS maximum output from a CD player than it does during a quiet passage at, say, 0.2 volts RMS?  Please explain the physics behind this to further my understanding.

 

 

Maynard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

All you need to do is trust me.

 

Oh, Travis, I don't know what to do any more. I have you asking me to trust you, and the voices in my head (the ones that only I can hear) telling me to trust them. I'm so confused ...

 

EDIT: Just in case somebody missed it; yes, that's intended to be humorous.

Edited by Edgar
Disclaimer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...