Jump to content

andyr

Members
  • Content Count

    11,842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

andyr last won the day on April 30 2016

andyr had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,052 Superstar

4 Followers

About andyr

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 30/04/1949

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Melbourne
  • Country
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Apologies if you regard my contribution to this thread as destructive, D. My contributions to threads are rarely based on 'mathematics' or explicit references to internet sites; I leave that to others on SNA, of a strictly objectivist mien - of which there are a number. (I won't mention names - as I don't want any complaints to management which might get me banned. ) I generally post, based on experiments I have done ... or what I've read. I posted that I found my Maggies sounded more dynamic when I moved from passive to active XOs; that's simply my experience. From that, my opinion of the path you are proceeding down ... is that will not deliver you as good a result as if you employed an active LP filter for your subs. Unfortunately, there is only one way to find out whether it's you - or I - that is correct ... and that is for you to implement an active setup as well as your passive setup - and decide which sounds better. Of course, to put at rest the minds of the objectivists out there ... this comparison must be done: a. with several people present - to get a spread of inherent biases, and b. blind. As this is unlikely to happen ... the point is moot. I wish you well in your build - at least it will have enabled you to 'scratch your itch'. Andy
  2. If that's the case then they wouldn't be able to deliver a LP slope at 60Hz. Unless you regard 60Hz a not a 'low frequency'. - in which case your statement is irrelevant Andy
  3. Same amps were used in both situations, av: passive biamping active biamping. Then I moved to active triamping. No, the inductors are not "just wires" - the way I see it, they are "wires with inductance". It's the inductance bit which is the bad thing - which reduces impact and slam - compared to when the amp is directly connected to the driver ... using a low inductance spkr cable. Andy
  4. True! But just because he puts up a proposed project ... doesn't mean he should get unanimous approval, M. Ummm, no, D ... I haven't built a passive LP filter to work at sub frequencies because - based on my experience converting my 3-way passive Maggies to 3-way active, 20 years ago - I never would (build a very low frequency passive LP filter)! The increase in dynamics I got from removing series inductors from in front of the drivers - so that the amps were directly connected to the drivers - surpassed my expectations. (And these were only ~5mH inductors, not 18mH!) So when I say "a passive LP filter @ 60Hz is certainly not the way to get impactful bass", I'm comparing it to doing the same thing with an active LP XO. But, yes, as you said ... if you have this itch to build a 60Hz passive XO ... you are completely at liberty to do it! Andy
  5. I'm glad you raised this point, Decky as I was also thinking it's an absolutely crazy thing to do, build a passive LP XO for sub frequencies! Forcing the sub signal to go through an 18mH coil is certainly not the way to get impactful bass! And using 700uF of cheap caps is not likely to result in sonic nirvana. Andy
  6. But they have to be at least 1.5m out from the front wall. Andy
  7. Aah, bugger! Heard yesterday that Bill McLean's tech wasn't happy with one of the panels he'd re-wired - presumably, the first one he did! - so decided to do it again! Annoying delay - but full marks for their quality control ethos. But I may have some further delay, before I can get to listen to them. I requested Bill use the 3mm aluminium foil that Magnepan use on current models, for the re-wire - instead of the original Al round-wire. I expect this will improve bass panel SQ (otherwise, why would Magnepan be using it!) but it'll probably lower the panel resistance. If it gets really low ... I will have to lower the DC rail voltage on my bass panel AKSA monoblocs, for them to be able to cope - which means buying 2 new power transformers (with lower secondary voltages). Just waiting to hear what the tech measured the panels' resistances as. Andy
  8. Sure, Bob - I don't think anyone with more than 2 neurons would disagree with your statement. But for caps which are not operating at a high temperature ... which gives the longer cap life: keeping them on for extended periods of time? or minimising their time 'on' but subjecting them to frequent cycling on and off (which was @Addicted to music's point)? That is what I am interested to know. Andy
  9. So Alan, are you suggesting that Peter's comment - here: this inrush of current when the component is first switched on ... is a figment of his imagination? Andy
  10. Maaate - you're supposed to attend a HiFi Show to look (and listen) to all the luvly gear on show ... not to f'ing well engage in arguments with exhibitors! A figment of your imagination, perhaps? Me, I reckon 20 minutes at least is needed. At least, that's the time it takes for voltages at various points in my Muse phono stages to stabilise. (Then again, I guess some people here would say it must obviously be very badly designed, to take that long! ) Andy
  11. You seem to be disagreeing with yourself, CnF?? I would agree that 'thermal degradation' shortens cap life. But what that means (to me, anyway) is that caps degrade, the hotter they get. However, switching caps on and off - compared to keeping them on for long periods of time - probably shortens the life of a cap. This is not due to temperature but to voltage stress (the cap has a voltage across it ... then it doesn't ... then it does ... etc.). Andy
  12. You are spot on, W! (I won't bother to comment on what Alan M wrote.) Andy
  13. Excellent! That's the logical thing to buy for your DAC. Jerome may have something (I've never experimented - so I can't comment). So try it as per the Topping website (DAC sitting right on top of the LPS) ... and then try it Jerome's way - with the LPS as far away as you can get it from the DAC. Listen, in each case, to "dynamic compression, shrunkened sound staging, bloated lower mid-bass "thump", and mid and high timbre hardness ". Andy
  14. Have a look here: https://au.element14.com/w/c/power-line-protection/power-supplies/ac-dc-converters/ac-dc-external-plug-in-adaptor-power-supplies?CMP=KNC-GAU-GEN-DSA-e14&brand=mean-well&gclid=Cj0KCQjw3JXtBRC8ARIsAEBHg4kbHtSk-RSMnibL9XbXpT-oQhr2lWbe9LuPm0FO_UDZr4_NOnjxaocaAsNyEALw_wcB I'm curious why you have a problem paying more for a PS than for the DAC itself? The two are independent, in my view. Andy
  15. I regard Meanwell as a good example of a SMPS - although I would add that, in my system, my sound was better when there was an isotran + hash filter between the Meanwell and the wall socker. And the Sbooster is a great example of a linear PS - also Clay Gieseler's. As I have no idea of your financial position, I don't know whether you would regard them as "reasonably priced". Andy
×
×
  • Create New...