ISO Regen performance Improvement Cheap!

[fas42]

1 hour ago, opus101 said:

 

Why? You reckon a scope can resolve CM noise differences?

 

Exactly. I would be staggered if anyone ever could bring up a picture on a scope which would definitively say, here's the problem with the loss of SQ, of the types I talk about - a scope is far too low in resolution, unless one goes to extreme lengths to generate a special waveform which was a representation of what was a factor.

[fas42]

13 hours ago, mansr said:

Sounds like you know what needs to be measured. Why don't you tell us so we can try it?

 

Sounds like you haven't been paying attention. I have repeatedly stated that at the moment it would be extremely difficult to show a measurement that correlated with what people can hear, when the SQ is not quite right. Which is why the solution at the moment is to use those perceptive ears - eventually, someone will nail a suite of test signals, nicely tied up with a pretty bow, that will "tell the full story" - but it ain't here yet ...

[fas42]

10 hours ago, Quadman said:

No mistaking anything, this simply was the best sound I have ever heard.  The whole stage starts 3 feet behind my speakers and then just goes back as far and as wide as you can imagine, never have I heard the depth and width that I got last night from my system/room.  The solidity and realness of the images so there so palpable, proper sized, not big headed, they had body and real dimension to them, harmonics and tonality again the best I have had.  The body of wood instruments had the best attack of the string and fullness of the instruments body that I have heard.  Second harmonics of these and the piano's sound board left my jaw agape.

 

I got into a 2 hour section of the evening playing classical, violin concerto's, that truly reminded my of my time in Minnesota sitting in center row 12 listening to Osmo Vanska leading the orchestra.  The width, depth, separation of the orchestra coupled with the magic tonality of the violins just took my breath away.  Even the softest woodwind passages had magic and clarity.  I had no walls, no speakers just glorious sound filling my room.  It was the most lifelike sound I have heard from any system.  Is there a limit to how good this can get?

 

A nice description of competent sound ... as regards limits, not really - there have been moments when I've realised that there is even more on tap, when enough of the setup is peaking simultaneously. If you can sustain the SQ you describe indefinitely, congrats!!

[fas42]

6 hours ago, Quadman said:

Normal 2 channel recordings tho everything is behind the plane of the speakers.

 

 

Yes. Unless the recording specifically has used phase manipulation to create an 'artificial' effect, then the soundstage elements remain resolutely behind the plane of the speakers - at all times, any images float completely free of the speakers, to as far back as the acoustic data places them.

[fas42]

13 hours ago, sandyk said:

 

 The OP is using LT3045 low noise voltage regulators in series . Unless they are preceded by typical larger value filter capacitors they will increase the apparent HF detail due to the low value and type of capacitors used at their input and output. ( Tantalum and ceramic usually), causing much larger soundstages and added HF detail ,which users of Spotify etc. seem to like because it normally lacks much soundstage and is apparently a little HF deficient.

That's why some members use a couple in series, despite the noise level already being VERY low.

They are manipulating phase information by doing this .

 

When a system is working well, the amount of HF is irrelevant - one can put on an old swing orchestra where the treble is amost completely absent; versus a modern pop production where it has been pushed up to to the 9's ( or is it 11's, ) - and the soundstage just, is. If one starts talking about the treble being "too much" that is an instant giveaway that the setup is not working right - one should not notice what any part of the spectrum is doing; you're should only be aware of music happening.

[fas42]

29 minutes ago, sandyk said:

Frank

 Perhaps in your system, but not in most other people's systems.

 Even the bipolar capacitor degradation over the years in the Crossovers to the Tweeters in the speakers causes a noticeable degradation compared to when new.  You just become accustomed to the gradual degradation.

 

Alex

 

Yes, those caps are one thing I do worry about ... if particularly nondescript, I replace with decent quality film; and/or give the speakers a good thrashing with plenty of treble content before taking them seriously. Stabilises the HF behaviour enough for decent sound to emerge.

 

The best solution is no caps, of course - DSP, fully active speakers.

[fas42]

This album, and this track, is a good test item for treble behaviour - the cymbals are going full bore, throughout ... how does this hold up?

 

 

[fas42]

8 hours ago, genjamon said:

A good biking friend of mine is a laser physicist who works with very ultra fast lasers, and their ability to test the speed of these lasers and their other characteristics depends upon low noise sensors.  He laughs at me when I talk about the noise specs of our audio equipment, since in his carefully controlled lab environment he and his peers can't get anywhere close to 1uV noise threshold - he says the wiring picks up WAY more noise than that.  

 

What exactly is causing which effects - now that's a good question.  And many ideas have been posited on this thread.  We won't be able to do anything more than this silly game of trial and error unless someone with skill and tools actually properly tests systematically for the effects of geometry, shielding, dielectric, etc on rejection and/or filtration of electrical interference.

 

If you want to get audio replay working at the best levels, then you do have to worry about all this "silliness". The inconvenient truth is that the ear are quite excellent at picking up anomalies that are at the "edge of audibility", which are caused by lack of electrical 'cleanness' - and these shortcomings of integrity can be, yes, everywhere. The standard build of equipment gear is just not good enough, irrespective of cost - unless the designers spent their efforts on improving this integrity instead of adding bling, and exotic parts.

 

And, it makes all the difference between conventional stereo sound, and competent recreations of musical events, if one decides to sort all this out. The reasons, issues, problems are all very straighforward things, no mysteries, all well understood in activities where people absolutely need to get high resolution happening - it's just that people have great faith that sloppiness of implementation in audio doesn't matter, so long as some measurements look good - well, it just ain't so ... the fussier one is, the more the subjective SQ benefits.

[fas42]

47 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

By having such a screwed-up system that just touching or changing anything, changes the sound.

 

No, not screwed up ... just much closer to optimum, which means every deviation from 'correctness' is more obvious ... if you have a window in the home which is generally dirty, and you're used to looking through it in that condition, varying the muckiness doesn't really change the experience - if then you go to some effort to make it truly clean then every last area which hasn't been truly wiped clean starts to really stand out - you can go nuts trying to extinguish the smallest bit of dirt that manages to resist your efforts to remove it!

 

This is the world of optimising audio ... the better it gets, the more precise work is required to 'clean' to the next level ... so, you have choices: accept a general OK'ness to the sound, be happy with that; or aim to get to ever finer degrees of apparent quality - I have never reached a point where more couldn't be retrieved from the recording; it's up to the individual.

[fas42]

11 hours ago, Speedskater said:

Nope, you are writing about a product that has a poorly designed power supply.

 

A very high percentage of power amplifiers have poor power supplies - this is why the sound deteriorates when higher sound levels are asked for. All sorts of solutions are possible; the 'easiest' one is is to to have multiple amps, one for each driver - the supplies are no better, but the load is divided.

[fas42]

12 hours ago, marce said:

Then you get comments like the one above, just makes me laugh, my experience of DC cables etc. makes me far more qualified than the poster to comment on such things, yet my views will be slagged of as a troll because they are at odds with all those that believe in magic dc cables.

 

How it works in the audio game is that at a certain point of "transparency", then doing the craziest things makes a difference in the perceived sound - I've been there numerous times ...

 

What's happening is that the SQ is an unstable equilibrium, meaning that the slightest perturbation tips the apparent quality in another direction - playing with a rig in this state is like adding rubber bands everywhere, to hold it together. The only way out of the "madness" is to address the underlying issues, sort them properly - and then all the peripheral silliness disappears ...

[fas42]

6 hours ago, Cornan said:

One thing that troubles me a bit though. Supra DAC clearly presents a wider sweet spot with my Gibson Les Paul 8 speakers. With the no-name 75 ohm cable I’ll need to be more in the dead center to enjoy it. With the Supra DAC I can be off center and still enjoy it immensely. Cannot explain why this is, but it is a fact in my perticular setup. ?

 

Okay, here is a marker for progress in optimising - a wider "sweet spot" says that the setup is working with less disturbing distortion; the mind doesn't have to work as hard in rejecting the 'crap' that the playback chain is adding to the mix.

 

The final stage of this progression is that the "sweet spot" is everywhere; the SQ is uniform throughout the room.

[fas42]

4 hours ago, charlesphoto said:

Pretty much sounds like Cornan describes. I will note I tried first with screw barrel connectors, and every time I get a more dynamic and slightly less veiled sound with the soldered Oyaides. It's subtle, but something to think about. I'm loving the bass slam with this combo, and the high end seems sweeter with the simple single strand of unshielded silver (less wincing moments for this tinnitus sufferer).
 

 

Here you have an almost perfect description, from someone else's mouth, as to why I hardwire everything. Not soldering == less dynamic, more veiled, less bass slam, less sweet high end, more wincing ...

 

Yes, it's subtle ... but it's also everything ...

[fas42]

Just tuned into this discussion, and downloaded the data sheet for those Kemets - of course these caps will do good everywhere, for DC, because the impedance curve is ideal; all the HF muck is filtered out to a much greater degree, and the more you put everywhere, the better it will be. Soldering, yes; to the closest you can get to where the legs enter the body, yes - but watch out for soldering temperatures; don't wreck the beast by cooking it!

[fas42]

2 hours ago, charlesphoto said:

 

Thinking about all of this, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to think about connection vs cable. The best of course would be short direct wire connections between the boards of the LPS, Lt3045 and mR (where the likes of the Signature Rendu probably gain an advantage). If you have to use a longer cable, then yes JSSG'ing it etc will be beneficial, but the best solution is to lose the cable altogether and just use short as possible lengths of largest gauge hook up wire. That's my theory. 

 

 

 

Yes, connections are everything. I did my own design of a chip amp assembly - and the real work was thinking as to how to organise the parts in 3D space so that every connection was optimal - zero path length was the goal! Looks a bit peculiar - but, it gets the SQ job done, nicely ...

[fas42]

4 hours ago, Abtr said:

It seems that a polymer aluminum capacitor (e.g., Kemet A750) across DC input may improve SQ by DC buffering/smoothing, shunting AC noise (decoupling and bypassing), and fast transient response to load change. I will try it with my active crossover boards and if that works one might ask why such a simple, cheap and obvious tweak isn't implemented as standard in all audio equipment?  

 

Exactly. Why it's not used more often is that there is general ignorance in the audio community of how critical it is to attenuate HF garbage, which is like a virulent pest, squeezing its way into the circuitry by every which way it can - you have to shut the door on this stuff by every means at one's disposal.

 

Why? Because it means the difference in the subjective quality exactly as Cornan described - if addressed to a sufficient degree, then convincing sound pops out. Many of the techniques I describe are aimed precisely at getting this aspect of a playback chain in best shape.

[fas42]

10 minutes ago, BigGuy said:

All seriousness aside, I thought this thread needed some comic relief...

You're welcome!

...but what about the foamed teflon?

 

At one stage I was looking closely at cable construction, and FEP makes a lot of sense - I bought some specialist cable to experiment with, but never followed through. I would certainly try some, to see if anything was gained.

[fas42]

5 hours ago, Cornan said:

 

Logics does’nt always make sense! Just try it and let me know if I was wrong that it improved SQ! ?

 

There always a logical reason for why the sound changes - but it may be very hard to pin down. As a general rule all audio systems are under-engineered - they work well enough to give good readings for all the typical tests, but our ears give the game away; they still add far too many audible anomalies. What I call a competent system is merely one that is working properly - and that's within the reach of virtually all half decent rigs.

 

Which is why all setups respond to tweaking - you're playing with the levels, and type of audible distortion, and everything one does alters this part of the mix. If the components were made properly in the first place, then none of this fiddling would be necessary, or relevant.

 

[fas42]

2 hours ago, bit01 said:

Hi,

I find that the  screw terminals loosen with time. I do have to re-tighten them from time to time and would not think of shrink wrap over them. Do you have the same experience, if so how do you get around it, holes in shrink, bonded screw to housing, solder?

b.

 

Any connection that relies on tightness of screws to maintain electrical integrity is a major weakness, if you're after optimum audio quality. The metal to metal contact has to be made truly gas tight, either by soldering or using silver type greases - nominal gas tightness is not good enough!

 

Every system I have ever been involved with has always benefited from taking this seriously ...

[fas42]

11 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

 

No, just use a little drop of Tweek on the conducting surfaces.  It is actually a differently named product put in small bottles - George knows that name but I've forgotten it.

 

NO NEED to solder everything in sight.

 

Stabilant 22. Been there, done that ...

 

Unfortunately, it's just not good enough - not for best audio, anyway. I spent months trying to get this type of method to do the job, and it always failed - if one is determined to leave an unresolved weakness in a setup, well, there is usually only one outcome ...

[fas42]

7 minutes ago, SuperRu said:

Something like this but silver based?

https://www.specialized.net/cp8-tb-thomas-betts-kopr-shield-compound-8-oz.html

 

That in fact may do the job - first time I've heard of it. Buy and try, would be my suggestion ...

[fas42]

4 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

the other issue is the use of Tweek, and Frank's belief that it is not adequate...

 

maybe he can detail his listening methodology as to whether a statistical number of trials, and whether he used blind listening

 

I agree Cornan.  For a consumer, why is less important that the result.  But one must ensure the result is actually SQ and not just an expectation that is confirmed for psychological reasons.

 

Do you need "a statistical number of trials" and "blind listening" to determine whether you've solved a rattle problem in your car?

 

Audiophiles are trapped in an endless pursuit of making their rigs "sound better" ... ummm, the trick is to to be able to hear whether the sound is right or not - is there a rattle, or isn't there? Almost nobody, yes, groks what this is about ... PeterSt is one of the rare individuals here who is attuned to this aspect - once you start thinking this way, it becomes trivially easy to pick when you are making real improvements ...

 

If one needs audiophile phrases, then think organic, natural, realistic, immersive, involving, holographic, makes you forget the system and only hear the music, etc, etc, etc ... these are just terms that describe competent playback.

 

Not having high integrity connections causes serious degradation of those qualities - if one can't hear the damage being done, then most tweaking of other types is probably not worth worrying about.

[fas42]

4 hours ago, charlesphoto said:

I'm with Cornan on this. I'm certainly thankful for any tips of course (going to use clamping tweezers between Kemet and wire when soldering for example), but I also like the freewheeling  investigative DIY nature esp. as It's just a dc cable. if the caps get screwed up and don't work, well you might hear it or might not, and it all cost pennies. Sounds worse? Snip 'em off! No need for handwringing over this. 

 

Yes, go for it! I like cheap, throw away gear - hack it to death, to find out what matters - if you kill it, so what?

 

The nightmare starts when you start fiddling with expensive components - so much value tied up in name, and bling - does one risk this or not? Unfortunately, the audio industry has evolved more into an art form, rather than engineering endeavour - will we emerge from this dark tunnel sooner, or later ... ?

[fas42]

Not quite sure what you're after, there ...

[fas42]

4 minutes ago, Nicholas_S said:

...in a room full of wire, screw connectors and loctite where they can start a new topic.

 

The inconvenient truth is that messy, 'technical' stuff is at the heart of the battle to get best sound - if you attempt to get around such by throwing money, names of fav companies, and gee whiz 'big' solutions - think MQA - at the 'problems', then you're likely to not really make valuable progress ...