Crazy But Not So Crazie Idea.......

any way richard you as very good designer and not stupid at all why do you think that people out there would not like the tone controls facility?
 
quate

Tenson said:
Why do they have to be in a different unit? 2 PEQ seem the perfect thing for sorting out room mode problems.
Click to expand...

magnetic interaction beteewn psu's and circuits in both pre-amp and tonal circuit,
 
nando said:
any way richard you as very good designer and not stupid at all why do you think that people out there would not like the tone controls facility?
Click to expand...

We have already been down this path in the past when the variability in sources needed it, we got rid of that crap, so now you want to inflict it on us again.
 
quote

Richard Dunn said:
We have already been down this path in the past when the variability in sources needed it, we got rid of that crap, so now you want to inflict it on us again.
Click to expand...

i don't understend "US" you are only a single minded person who has your own views but has no poer to speak for the needs of the majority or needs of sound devices that they may wish to enjoy, as for the past it is coming back,
 
nando said:
i don't understend "US" you are only a single minded person who has your own views but has no poer to speak for the needs of the majority or needs of sound devices that they may wish to enjoy, as for the past it is coming back,
Click to expand...

"US" is the community of Hi-Fi enthusiasts. The sentiments are *MY* opinion, that should be obvious to anyone.
 
the ''camel'' analogy is coming up I fear.

Everybody has different viewpoint on what makes the best possible attenuator/selection device.


You can tell a lot about people's design choices (at large) by what they've put in this thread.

It wouldn't be a suprise to many that my own choice would be to make a version of the Kondo M77 pre-amp. I'm going to do this as a project in the long term anyway.

Richard likes passives, Simon likes to manipulate in the digital domain, and so on.


It is rather like a menu at a restaurant with everybody choosing slightly differently.
 
It also surely comes down to system and location.

Give me a sympathetic system and near perfect room and I'd be happy with passive, on the basis that I wouldn't want to manipulate the signal. In that regard I expect I'm not firmly in either camp, and nor are many others.

Most sytems and certainly most rooms are far from perfect on many levels and these can be subjectively improved with manipulation IMO.
I don't really get the ideological ojections to this approach, given that we have to use manipulation throughout the system, be it the speaker crossover, RIAA stage, digital playback filters etc.
I've heard otherwise great systems ruined by things like bass boom from really bad rooms. So you do as much as possible to mitigate the problem with placement but often that approach has limits, either becasue you cannot control the problem or you introduce an inverse problem such as bass suck-out.
In that situation, music can often be irritating and unlistenable. So you can say, 'well I'm remaining true to my ideals and bollox to signal manipulation' and not enjoy music on that system, or you can be pragmatic and eccept that something can be done to improve matters on a subjective level. It means compromising ideals and yes it might even mean you sacrifice the n'th degree of transparency (though that is arguable) but who cares if the overall listening experience is improved.
 
very well put rob, i guess that is what i would like to achive with help towards that issue of listening to music the way you want to, as most recordings specially old need should we say tonal tuning, after all define passive if in true form it becomes active via power amplification, that in it self is contradiction.
 
question, are tone controls if made to work in cojuntion with a pre-amp by using by-pass and valves in partnerd with solid state? the tonal control is not bass and treble, more on a scope through all spectrum of both analogue nd digtal.!
 
nando said:
question, are tone controls if made to work in cojuntion with a pre-amp by using by-pass and valves in partnerd with solid state? the tonal control is not bass and treble, more on a scope through all spectrum of both analogue nd digtal.!
Click to expand...

That makes absolutely no sense.
 
neither does passive when it has to become active from output, not all recordings are perfect , not all rooms are, tone controls need active pre-amps but the idea is to be able to have the better of both, with the facilty of using the pre-amp without tonal control and activate when needed tone tuning device,
 
Nando have you thought of doing a chip amp and making it as simple as design as possible. Have a really good power supply and a clear signal path with no tone controls and minimal switching?

Jim.
 
nando said:
neither does passive when it has to become active from output, not all recordings are perfect , not all rooms are, tone controls need active pre-amps but the idea is to be able to have the better of both, with the facilty of using the pre-amp without tonal control and activate when needed tone tuning device,
Click to expand...

I meant your English made no sense, so I still do not know what you are talking about.

On the subject of active pre well I made them and I know why they were made, because in the past they were needed. A pre in those days was just a glorified phono stage and active (buffered) tape loop with a bit of gain thrown in for luck, as turntable and cassette / tape were the prime sources. Tone controls were needed because none of the mediums were very accurate, the state of the art needed fidling. Now Rob argues it still does, I argue it doesn't, there are better ways to do it at source, and now sources are just so accurate there is no need to mess with them. Speakers is another matter, but my view is just select the right speaker for your acoustic then you have no problem, trying to force a round peg into a square hole is not sensible, and for every acoustic there is a speaker that works, take my word for it, it is just subjective and using *your* ears and *your* music. There is no such thing as *the* answer.
 
quote

Richard Dunn said:
I meant your English made no sense, so I still do not know what you are talking about.

On the subject of active pre well I made them and I know why they were made, because in the past they were needed. A pre in those days was just a glorified phono stage and active (buffered) tape loop with a bit of gain thrown in for luck, as turntable and cassette / tape were the prime sources. Tone controls were needed because none of the mediums were very accurate, the state of the art needed fidling. Now Rob argues it still does, I argue it doesn't, there are better ways to do it at source, and now sources are just so accurate there is no need to mess with them. Speakers is another matter, but my view is just select the right speaker for your acoustic then you have no problem, trying to force a round peg into a square hole is not sensible, and for every acoustic there is a speaker that works, take my word for it, it is just subjective and using *your* ears and *your* music. There is no such thing as *the* answer.
Click to expand...

ok richard, i understand what you are saying i thought that there is a need for tone controls how ever the speakers that people choose is either they heard them in different rooms and loved them , bought them and don't suit their rooms acoustically , so do you not think that tonal control will help? forgive my Spanish grammar.
 
well i had a call from holland about this crazy idea and they have a very devoted hi-fi history and they love this project so much that they are willing to be the first buyer,
 
Tenson said:
You've always said that Richard, but in my experience (and academic understanding) it is not usually the case. In fact it isn't my experience of filters in general. I think nearly all systems in audio, be they electronic or mechanical are improved by filtering of some sort.

Actually just thinking about it, I guess your amps use feedback of some sort, and isn't that filtering? Have you built a zero-feedback , single-ended amp before, and what did you think?
Click to expand...

Simon believe it or not I respect your views and I used to have similar when I was doing PA and studio work 30-40 years ago, but I learnt different. I learnt from people who knew how to integrate speakers into an acoustics such as Roy Allison and I learnt from my own design experience. *Every* filter no matter if electronic or mechanical removes some of the quality of the music, stick a duster in the mouth of a sax and see what I mean. It is last resort, not first resort, and there are many thing we still *have* to use them for but the pro-world piles them on top of each other until the music is lost.
 
speakers are personal most cases they live with you the longest, tone controls are esential,
 
If you are going to produce an amp under the name "zerogain" then of course it has to be just a switching unit or a passive. otherwise its bonkers from a marketing perspective
 
DarrenW said:
If you are going to produce an amp under the name "zerogain" then of course it has to be just a switching unit or a passive. otherwise its bonkers from a marketing perspective
Click to expand...

Good point! The power amp and phono stage might be a bit crap though.

Tony.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top