Well, as I said, I have classical performers as friends- including one who is world renowned and actually won the Tchaikovsky festival quite a few years ago and was also (and may still be) a judge for the festival. I know good piano when I hear it. As he once said to me (he was quoting a famous pianist- I can't remember whom)- you can either play the piano or you can't, and you can either recognize expertly played piano or you can't. I'm not fond of jazz piano, for example. They all sound like incompetent hacks to me, even Oscar Peterson that I did a recording studio install for in Mississauga many, many years ago...That one. the component ICON. Yeah it does kind of look like a gate or an electrical plug. That's the one I've been using from
EDIT dropdown, labeled "component".
Reading through your e-stat reply. That is good to know. I had a feeling you used your
ears. And as an engineer, that ain't bad either. It's always good to know people who
can cut the wheat from the chaff.
I have a good system too. It's not the be all end all, etc but it's not bad. I've got
a variety of Tube and SS amps pre amps from Modified HK Citation II to Marantz 170DC
into highly modified Klipsch Cornwalls. I've got a pair of Speakers designed for
Studio Mastering that a need to put online along with dialing in an active 3 way
or 4 way (if sub woofer is needed) cross over. Nothing is too new though.
I grew up playing and composing piano so my ear is trained to hear acoustic
music along the range of the piano including feeling all their 97 keys.
Before those among you start to protest may I suggest you find the
Bosendorfer web site and look up their Imperial Concert Grand.
I've spend too much time listening to small band combo's live music,
symphonies and everything in between. I know one thing,
I am very sensitive to SS distortion, be it from standard drivers or
horn loaded systems. I've always carried ear plugs with me
when ever I go for a listen.
Pianists find out quickly just how sucky it is to play these things.
You get stuck with whatever is around because you can't take it
with you. Typically it will be out of tune and the action that is
so heavy or sloppy you don't even like playing the thing.
Even if they are relatively well kept it is still not yours and most
wouldn't even know if they came upon an action that Vladimir Horowitz
would enjoy (lighter then the Steinway standard of 55 grams.) or for
that matter the guy from our sister city here in Texas, Van Cliburn.
Next time go to a music store and check out the pianos.
But, that is neither hear nor there. Now 15 or more IPS isn't all that bad.
Especially if the tape is known master.
Any way it is all good and I finally got to where this LTSpice thing is on par
with Wyns.
I can't think any longer and need to step away from the 'puter.
Converting the AD797 MC Phono Pre to a MM Phono Pre - A Mixed Design.
- Thread starter USMC Spike
- Start date
USMC Spike
Well-Known Member
As I look at the output of the LME49710 then the TL1115 They are note quite identical.
If it step back, one at a time. the Solid line at 0dB and the dotted line.
I'm not sure of the differences?
I did figure out Hover + ctrl removes the V+ and V- after I added them too.
Solid is pretty stable to around 100KHz then it slops to the -3dB point around 127KHz.
I am not sure how phase angle plays into this (along the right verticle scale). Perhaps
the dotted line? Which would explain the +6 degrees of phase shift at the low end and
max phase shift at 2MHz.
Question, Do the outputs of a channel go through the various
schematics on the right? Do I just click them?
Clicking on the upper left most schematic while keeping the top MM schmatic in view.
Well just clicking on the ideal riaa pre amp...changed things significantly.
If yields some good comparison data. Holy Smokes.
If it step back, one at a time. the Solid line at 0dB and the dotted line.
I'm not sure of the differences?
I did figure out Hover + ctrl removes the V+ and V- after I added them too.
Solid is pretty stable to around 100KHz then it slops to the -3dB point around 127KHz.
I am not sure how phase angle plays into this (along the right verticle scale). Perhaps
the dotted line? Which would explain the +6 degrees of phase shift at the low end and
max phase shift at 2MHz.
Question, Do the outputs of a channel go through the various
schematics on the right? Do I just click them?
Clicking on the upper left most schematic while keeping the top MM schmatic in view.
Well just clicking on the ideal riaa pre amp...changed things significantly.
If yields some good comparison data. Holy Smokes.
As do I. I befriended two TAS reviewers in the 70s when I was a teenager. Harry's systems were nothing short of phenomenal. Of all the fantastic gear that I heard at Sea Cliff, I think only the ASR Emitter II resorted to using chip based op amps (843s?). I definitely favor the overall result of components using class A, zero feedback discrete active devices, be they JFETs or triodes.
Fortunately, much better exists today. Having said that my Oppo 103 used in the HT has TL072s and the M Audio card in my PC running the office system uses 5532s. Neutral response for sure - just lacking in transparency.
So, the answer to my question is "no".
I trust "roadies" for classical entourages schlep only instruments instead of mixing boards, obnoxious pro amps and speakers.
Isn't amazing how non-discerning conductors and many classical musicians are? Dr. Cooledge who continues to perform as a baritone with the ASO chorus introduced me to Robert Shaw and Robert Spano. They cared little about true high resolution systems. JWC was on the board at one time and convinced them to partner with Telarc for a long run of recordings. I performed a minor role in The Firebird. Live, unamplified music is my reference too. And enjoy regular doses when wifey plays her baby grand.
Last edited:
USMC Spike
Well-Known Member
LOL, same with musicians for the most part. They are either sight readers with technique or
musicians who feel their way through a piece and can't read scheisse.
Rarely will you have one in the same person.
Now looking at the input of the top of the schematics...
I should be looking at the output?
I assume the input is ideal on these.
musicians who feel their way through a piece and can't read scheisse.
Rarely will you have one in the same person.
Now looking at the input of the top of the schematics...
I should be looking at the output?
I assume the input is ideal on these.
Those are hybrids that still use chip based op amps. I refer to the discrete FET based units like the V5 and V6. I replaced OPA2134s and OPA2604 with V5s in a Music Hall DAC with great success. Click link for details. They definitely elevated the performance.
Last edited:
If you remove the 10pF cap the differences become more apparent. The LT1115 almost oscillates- it shows a 15dB + peak at a bit above 1MHz, while the 49710 is clean.
This should not matter, but it's indicative of marginal phase margin performance and the peaked noise could cause folding issues in the audio band. Surprisingly enough, just looking at 20-20kHz is just not enough. RF DOES matter.
USMC Spike
Well-Known Member
Let me compare the LT1115 with the upper left output schematic.
I'm not sure I follow you I removed both c27, c28 from each schematic.
First the LME49710 device.
Second the LT1115 device.
They are so different I'm not sure if something went wrong.
I'm not sure I follow you I removed both c27, c28 from each schematic.
First the LME49710 device.
Second the LT1115 device.
They are so different I'm not sure if something went wrong.
Last edited:
He and I are from the same town and I have friends and relatives who went to the same high school as he did. We lived about 2 miles apart. He and I also went to college in London, England- he to The Royal College of Music and I to Imperial College, and they're adjacent and often did joint concerts. We both disliked London greatly. That reminds me, it's been a couple of months since we last were in touch and I need to answer his last e-mail. He had a series of performances with his orchestra in China just before Xmas.
As I said, it's all subjective. What does "definitely" mean? Heck, I like the sound of tube amps with decent amounts of feedback, but not SETs, but my reviewer friend LOVES the SET sound. I like electrostatic loudspeakers ( I have Quad ESL63s, and Martin Logan Prodigys and Montis) and the sound of the ESS DACs designed by my ex friend and colleague Martin Mallinson. What does any of this actually mean in an objective sense?
By the way, I designed the AD843, amongst others. I also was instrumental in the process development that was necessary for them, and I made ADI fellow at least partially as a result of those efforts.As do I. I befriended two TAS reviewers in the 70s when I was a teenager. Harry's systems were nothing short of phenomenal. Of all the fantastic gear that I heard at Sea Cliff, I think only the ASR Emitter II resorted to using chip based op amps (843s?). I definitely favor the overall result of components using class A, zero feedback discrete active devices, be they JFETs or triodes.
Fortunately, much better exists today. Having said that my Oppo 103 used in the HT has TL072s and the M Audio card in my PC running the office system uses 5532s. Neutral response for sure - just lacking in transparency.
So, the answer to my question is "no".
I trust "roadies" for classical entourages schlep only instruments instead of mixing boards, obnoxious pro amps and speakers.
Isn't amazing how non-discerning conductors and many classical musicians are? Dr. Cooledge who continues to perform as a baritone with the ASO chorus introduced me to Robert Shaw and Robert Spano. They cared little about true high resolution systems. JWC was on the board at one time and convinced them to partner with Telarc for a long run of recordings. I performed a minor role in The Firebird. Live, unamplified music is my reference too. And enjoy regular doses when wifey plays her baby grand.
One thing I have learned over the years is not to trust the audiophile opinions of musicians. Their perspective is all wrong. I'm currently trying to fight, or at least contain, the introduction of the Meyer Constellation system in our new "State of the Art" concert hall...
Follow the embedded link as I suggested for a more complete description. To paraphrase what you posted earlier, you can either distinguish superior sound quality or you can't.
I've never been a fan of SETs as they are not a good match for electrostats.
As a coherency freak, I'm not a fan of hybrids either. I find the contrast in directivity between the disparate drivers distracting and unnatural sounding. The later Quads are certainly nice. There's just not enough panel area and more linear components exist for the interfaces.
Objective sense? The human perception of sound is more complex than many give credit. Just dialing in boatloads of corrective feedback as is required to tame high open loop gain op amps provides great numbers on paper but suffers in ways that experienced listeners perceive. Just as there are those who can consistently identify higher resolution digital recordings than the dated Redbook standard. The parameters of which were fenced in and limited to computer storage media technology available in 1980, as opposed to truly providing equivalence to the best analog recordings at the time.
I generally provide a number of options as far as input is concerned. Ideal RIAA- using both the Laplacian and the discrete component equivalent. I also add terms to approximate the arm and cartridge mechanical resonances and the effect of the LC network that the cartridge represents. They all give different answers.
Choose whichever you wish to have. I have a combo that is a very accurate representation of the cartridge/arm combo, both electrical and mechanical, that I have at home.
I truly wish you the best of luck. Introducing sound reinforcement for anything other than the conductor providing opening comments or the occasional spotlight mike for a solo vocalist makes zero sense for me. Spend the money on the hall with adjustable acoustical panels or other genuinely useful things.
There's a classical pianist, Ashkenazy IIRC, who would have the stereos removed from his BMWs because he was so surrounded by live music in his life that he simply had no use for passive playback during other activities. I don't doubt that some musicians lack of enthusiasm for hifi has similar origins.
There's nothing like the sound of a well designed auditorium and a well rehearsed orchestra or choir.
Still enjoying this thread.
Wyn, are you a member over at diyaudio? I have a thread over there on some modifications I'm attempting on a vintage receiver. I've done a full spice sim of the amplifier section and would love input from someone of your expertise.
There's nothing like the sound of a well designed auditorium and a well rehearsed orchestra or choir.
Still enjoying this thread.
Wyn, are you a member over at diyaudio? I have a thread over there on some modifications I'm attempting on a vintage receiver. I've done a full spice sim of the amplifier section and would love input from someone of your expertise.
Follow the embedded link as I suggested for a more complete description. To paraphrase what you posted earlier, you can either distinguish superior sound quality or you can't.
I've never been a fan of SETs as they are not a good match for electrostats.
As a coherency freak, I'm not a fan of hybrids either. I find the contrast in directivity between the disparate drivers distracting and unnatural sounding. The later Quads are certainly nice. There's just not enough panel area and better components exist for the interfaces.
Objective sense? The human perception of sound is more complex than many give credit. Just dialing in boatloads of corrective feedback as is required to tame high open loop gain op amps provides great numbers on paper but suffers in ways that experienced listeners perceive. Just as there are those who can consistently identify higher resolution digital recordings than the dated Redbook standard. The parameters of which were fenced in and limited to computer storage media technology available in 1980, as opposed to truly providing equivalence to the best analog recordings at the time.
Frankly, the directivity issue is not something that I notice. I sit in one spot, I use XTZ PRO to calibrate my system/room and I use DSP to correct the LF response (my Montis are modified to give access to the bass driver and panels separately) to the electrostats base units and the sub woofers that I use. The response is remarkably coherent, flat and extended (-3dB at 16 Hz, +/- 3dB 16Hz to 20 kHz).
I also have conducted blind tests that indicate to a 98.4 % (10 out of 12) probability that listeners on my system can tell, and prefer, both upsampled and native higher resolution digital playback than standard Red book play back. However, at least one standard redbook play back (Avalon) was preferred to the LP.
I occasionally participate, as does an ADI colleague, Scott Wurcer- also an ADI fellow- who actually designed the AD797. Scott is a long time audiophile who is a bit more subjective than I.There's a classical pianist, Ashkenazy IIRC, who would have the stereos removed from his BMWs because he was so surrounded by live music in his life that he simply had no use for passive playback during other activities. I don't doubt that some musicians lack of enthusiasm for hifi has similar origins.
There's nothing like the sound of a well designed auditorium and a well rehearsed orchestra or choir.
Still enjoying this thread.
Wyn, are you a member over at diyaudio? I have a thread over there on some modifications I'm attempting on a vintage receiver. I've done a full spice sim of the amplifier section and would love input from someone of your expertise.
You can tell him from me he did a fine job, and we named a whole phono stage after it.
I've argued this, but to no avail. Dmitri sitkovetski, the music director, likes it, and I've argued the point.
I like Dima, he's not just a terrific violinist but a very nice guy, but he's no audiophile even though his violin is glorious. In general he seems to listen to me, and I will be present during the system installation, so perhaps I can at least keep it under control.
USMC Spike
Well-Known Member
Someone else was recommending that too me also, I'm thinking it is the XTZ Pro.
But maybe not. It had it's own version of an active cross over data that wasn't
compatible with what I'll use.
I've used the Room eq wizard as a start...I probable should use it again
now that I've reconfigured parts of the living room. Nothing fancy but it worked.
But maybe not. It had it's own version of an active cross over data that wasn't
compatible with what I'll use.
I've used the Room eq wizard as a start...I probable should use it again
now that I've reconfigured parts of the living room. Nothing fancy but it worked.
Call it a curse, but I first noticed my (hyper) sensitivity to such as a teenager. Which I why I immediately fell in love with Dr. Cooledge's Dayton-Wrights.
I sit in one spot also, but having a piano's fundamentals sound X wide and its harmonics Y wide is noticeable to me. It's not about tonal balance. Using a small forest of bass traps and having the luxury of ideal placement from the front wall (~8 feet), I get remarkably neutral measured response following lots of experimentation.
As has been found in studies like this.
As truly an expert in the field of op amps, I have a question - and let me digress for a moment. What you do most certainly has benefited the audio public. The devices today are far and away better than early Fairchild 741s found in 70s era Crown amps (I bought a D150 as a teenager) and LM301s found in a wide range of stuff from the Quad 405 to Dynaco PAT-5 (had one of those, too). It is amazing that you can get a darn nice sounding preamp today for $150 US. The performance gap between them and the best discrete devices has definitely narrowed over the years. Here's my question: Why is op amp topology necessarily so complex? Like having to dial in lots of correction, are there other factors that limit you from using simpler, more linear approaches?
Last edited:
Similar threads
