0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 11450 times.
Jonathon, if you had actually read my previous posts on this string, you would have seen that the 11A has been listening tested for years. In fact I mentioned using speakers up to 28 grand. (Interesting you would not quote me.) In fact I have not mentioned measurements once in my posts on this string, so why the claim that I stated the exact opposite of what I actually posted. And what is your opinion of no perfection based on? Amateurs/diyers claiming to be industry participants? Dodd made a good move by using batteries as he eliminates the mistakes of almost all designers in building a power supply. It is a little irritating that a few claim since they cannot obtain their goal, no one else can either. Our purpose here is to help the public, not mislead.CheersSteve
While running a test signal through it, of course, that is at the preamps highest impedance and voltage. I'm not sure what you're saying exactly, but you can use a multi-meter with ampere function in place of a fuse to measure. There's no reason you'd leave the fuse in. But here's a question, if there's a fuse in your preamp what size is it? That'll give us a rough idea of the amperes.
Steve, I am sorry that I did not make my point as clearly as I intended. I did not intend to imply anything regarding your mentioning of measurements, or lack thereof. I also read very clearly that you made note that the 11A had been listening tested, along with by way of the cost figures listed a wide variety of speakers.Your second to last sentence maybe underscores my point and maybe clears up some confusion between yourself and Folsom earlier. With your preamp, you achieved your goal, and that of many others in the pursuit of the sound they are after. Great! Congratulations! I hope to find my way to my ideal someday as well.What I believe Folsom took issue with, and the point I was trying to make, is that "perfection" and "achieving your goals" are two completely different things. Further, it seems in the pursuit of audio, everyone's definition of "perfection" varies and likely none of them truly are perfection in the most literal sense, which seemed to me to be the definitive tone you took in the exchange. No amount of measuring (my insertion) or listening (yours) will likely ever be able to result to all parties' satisfaction in the literally flawlessly ideal widget. To believe that in no way, ever, by anyone can a thing be improved beyond where it currently is no matter how difficult or how little improvement that may ever be is really a hard argument to make. Tomorrow we may all wake up with some newly discovered revelation that changes all of what we know, making everything before it something less than we thought the night before. If we as a species ever get to the end of the road in discovery, I think the world will be a far less interesting place.Again, my apologies if I was in error, but reading the thread just now, I was also commenting on a different version of your reply to Folsom than I see currently which I unfortunately could not quote in my reply, as the quote would only place the current version in my text; we must have been writing very close to the same time with the message system hiccuping.
Depending on how the preamp works as a buffer, regulation may provide no benefit by itself. Some buffers act to correct the signal changes, so whatever voltage goes in, comes out. If the parts used aren't overly sensitive to sounding different from biasing, then you only need as high of working voltage as the parts require or the music plays. But they so often provide better filtration that it's worth it. Just like the Teddy I linked you to, it provides wonderful low noise power.
George, have you seen my Antipole? That's how I prefer to do unregulated.
Steve, what he was trying to say was a variation in power supply voltage would make no much of a difference in tube transconductance...
So Steve, Does that 11A pre-amp use an output coupling cap? And what type of RCA connectors are used on it?
