Questions For Interview With Bruno Putzeys & Lars Risbo About Purifi Audio

[fas42]

What sort of testing was done to ensure that the units are intrinsically resistant to interference, noise factors? That is, how much work needs to be done by implementers to fully shield the modules from anomalies in their electrical environment?

[fas42]

Which brings up another question: how effective is the output filtering at completely removing all non-audio frequencies; compared to earlier versions of that technology?

[fas42]

This is pretty good ... https://www.soundstageultra.com/index.php/features-menu/general-interest-interviews-menu/455-searching-for-the-extreme-bruno-putzeys-of-mola-mola-hypex-and-grimm-audio-part-one

 

I particularly like his emphasis, here, on being extremely fussy about isolating the module from external muck - and his thoughts on how feedback as conventionally used is nowhere near good enough.

[fas42]

 

3 hours ago, crenca said:

 

Instead, I am looking for a specific inteligible question for Bruno around this:  How do these new amps sound?  What is your goal around sound?  and the like...

 

 

Ummm, they sound like nothing ... or should. If they have a 'sound', then the goal hasn't been met - if you have a rig, and swap the amplfier, and the sound changes, subjectively - then at least one of the two amplifiers is 'flawed'.

[fas42]

7 minutes ago, barrows said:

 

2.  Clarity/transparency, an amp with no sound of its own with vanishingly low noise and distortions, at a reasonable price, with plenty of power as well.

 

Translation: one should be able to increase volume to the point of clipping with zero subjective change in the tonality, and sense, of the presentation. This normally doesn't happen, and the speakers are always blamed - but the reality is that it's the amplifier that's nearly always the villain - it takes working with a sorted setup to appreciate this fact.

[fas42]

7 hours ago, crenca said:

If the answer is "yes/possibly", coming back to my original question, what is responsible for the "sound" of a really (really really) clean amplifier like the 1ET400A as compared to a well regarded Class A/B, or even a well regarded Class A SS amp?  Using are ears, we all can tell the characteristic "sound" of these amps, so what accounts for this beyond harmonic/non-harmonic distortion measurements?

 

Easy to answer that question: because no amplifier, or other link in a reproduction chain operates in isolation ... they are always part of a system - and the remaining weakest areas will dictate "what the sound is".

 

Why have planes fallen out of the sky, over the years? Is it because the engines, the wings, or the cockpit isn't "good enough"? None of these ... it's the areas that haven't been addressed or looked after properly that undermine the integrity of what the system, whether it's a plane or audio system, is supposed to do.

 

Easy to tell if planes are safe; just count the number that fall out of the sky each year - but much, much harder, so far, to assess rig playback - just saying one is nicer to listen to than another doesn't cut it, I'm afraid.

[fas42]

8 hours ago, mfsoa said:

It is stunning when one realizes how much information is not making out of one's previous amp when a DAC amp is installed, the difference is so striking.

 

 

 

This is a general aspect of current audio systems - the amount of detail that is discarded, by one means or another, is quite staggering at times; one would swear that it's a different recording, .

 

The almost unconscious behaviour of audiophiles is that when the distortion is too obvious, too unpleasant, that they then 'tweak' the rig to hide this undesirable part - classic throwing out the baby with the ...