LessLoss Firewall for Loudspeakers

[fas42]

11 hours ago, hopkins said:

 

Thanks - I would be very curious to know whether this is in fact demonstrated (for all these high frequencies in the Mhz, way above our listening range). I have never heard of this. Do you have any references for this ? 

 

Yes, the electronics "bible", The Art of Electronics ... specifically in the chapter on noise and interference, one of the examples of a "gotcha",

 

Quote

 

Coupling to outputs

Ordinarily the output impedance of an op-
amp is low enough that you don't have to
worry about capacitive signal coupling. In
the case of high-frequency or fast-switching
interference, however, you have just cause
for alarm, particularly if the desired out-
put signal involves some degree of preci-
sion.

 

 

Now, replace opamp with audio power amp, and ...

[fas42]

6 hours ago, Vincent des Champs said:

From first hand experience I can say it does work flawlessly: most notable improvement is the sense of depth. This improvement creates huge air around every layer in the music which is mesmerizing.

 

Noise is the enemy. I can't state this too strongly, and every thing I've learned over the years keeps pointing the same way - if you get rid of this problem area in an audio chain then the change in what you hear can be truly astonishing ...

[ASRMichael]

Ouch £1650 for s set! I might as Elite Audio if I can borrow a set. 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

9 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

Yes, the electronics "bible", The Art of Electronics ... specifically in the chapter on noise and interference, one of the examples of a "gotcha",

 

 

Now, replace opamp with audio power amp, and ...

 

Having low power, very  high frequencies influence the power regulation of an amplifier is a little surprising, IMO. One would assume that this would be something well documented. 

 

It would be nice to have an "expert panel" of electrical engineers at our disposal here to give their opinion on these types of questions and products!

 

I guess out curiosity to understand what this product does exavtly will remain unanswered. 

[yamamoto2002]

It seems when the solid copper surface resistivity is increased, the current flow avoids the surface.

 

Edit: this is just guessing, the LessLoss device reduces damping factor? it can be audible difference.
 

 

Reference: https://www.mathworks.com/help/releases/R2021a/pde/ug/skin-effect-in-wire-with-circular-cross-section.html

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Here is a documentation on an alternative mentioned by @Norton

http://www.dnm.co.uk/datasheets/SpkrHFTNwithZRTNannouncement.pdf

 

They also mention the influence on the feedback mechanism of RF. 

 

I'm glad my amplifier has a constant voltage steering and does not rely on loudspeaker feedback! But who knows... 

 

This is also to say that if there is some validity to the claims of Lessloss (or at least of DNM) the efficacy may vary according to the type of amplifier used (tube, class D, etc...)? So this may not be a universal solution?

 

[bodiebill]

Fwiiw, a DIY version of the firewall for loudspeakers is avalable for $800:

https://www.lessloss.com/docs/fw/LessLoss_Firewall640x-SPK-schematics.pdf

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

3 hours ago, bodiebill said:

Fwiiw, a DIY version of the firewall for loudspeakers is avalable for $800:

https://www.lessloss.com/docs/fw/LessLoss_Firewall640x-SPK-schematics.pdf

 

What a deal! 😂

[bodiebill]

Today I received my 2nd hand LL firewalls. My initial impression -- see @Vincent des Champs' demo session above -- was confirmed. To my ears the effect of these barrels is not tonal coloration or changed frequency response but rather a considerable increase in spaciousness. The perceived sound area is transformed from a rugby ball (left-right more elongated than front-back and top-bottom) to a larger full sphere. The sense of being part of the music increases. For me this is a big SQ step forward -- at least comparable to the steps I experienced as a result of proper convolution, a top notch external reference clock and Diretta.

 

@hopkins I do understand and respect your quest for simplicity, and that none of this will appeal to you. However, for some reason I did not succeed -- so far -- to achieve this level of satisfaction with simpler means. Maybe one day I will. Not that the commercial audio world will help me achieve that, as more money can be made by fragmentation. For instance, the function of these barrels could easily be built into a loudspeaker, or into a loudspeaker wire. Then we would just praise these products without realizing their added complexity.

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

20 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

@hopkins I do understand and respect your quest for simplicity, and that none of this will appeal to you. However, for some reason I did not succeed -- so far -- to achieve this level of satisfaction with simpler means. Maybe one day I will. Not that the commercial audio world will help me achieve that, as more money can be made by fragmentation. For instance, the function of these barrels could easily be built into a loudspeaker, or into a loudspeaker wire. Then we would just praise these products without realizing their added complexity.

 

Glad you find improvements. 

 

Please don't spend too much time trying to figure out my intentions! On the one hand, I find all this amusing. We've got to keep a sense of humor in this hobby. On the other I am always curious to learn more and discover new things. The discussion in this thread has been interesting. I do like to understand why things work the way they do, or at the very least know that audio engineers understand it... In fact, I asked our friend John Brown about the possibility of RF on cables having an effect on amplifier performance. Will let you know if he answers. 

 

As far as simplicity, no problem with these, they are "passive" and just extensions of the cable. 

[fas42]

6 hours ago, bodiebill said:

Today I received my 2nd hand LL firewalls. My initial impression -- see @Vincent des Champs' demo session above -- was confirmed. To my ears the effect of these barrels is not tonal coloration or changed frequency response but rather a considerable increase in spaciousness. The perceived sound area is transformed from a rugby ball (left-right more elongated than front-back and top-bottom) to a larger full sphere. The sense of being part of the music increases. For me this is a big SQ step forward -- at least comparable to the steps I experienced as a result of proper convolution, a top notch external reference clock and Diretta.

 

Which says that noise is such a common issue with more ambitious systems - the full value of the components purchased won't be realised unless the degradation caused by too much interference is addressed, by some means ...

 

6 hours ago, bodiebill said:

@hopkins I do understand and respect your quest for simplicity, and that none of this will appeal to you. However, for some reason I did not succeed -- so far -- to achieve this level of satisfaction with simpler means. Maybe one day I will. Not that the commercial audio world will help me achieve that, as more money can be made by fragmentation. For instance, the function of these barrels could easily be built into a loudspeaker, or into a loudspeaker wire. Then we would just praise these products without realizing their added complexity.

 

 

Yes, simplicity wins. But it won't overcome issues, if some area of the chain is too simplified. What needs to happen with, say, the link between amplifier outputs and speaker drivers is that all the subtleties of that area be fully investigated, so that all the confusion about tweaks be got rid of.

 

There are all sorts of ways to "solve this" ... the simplest is active speakers, the amplifiers have a very short, hardwired connection to what they drive; the speaker is effectively part of the amplifier circuit. Or, add the necessary refinement to the output stage of the amplifier so that it fully resists interference. Or, use an amplifier design which is intrinsically not affected by noise - the ecdesigns is probably an example of this. Or, add the 'protection' inside the speaker, as just suggested - I tend to think this is the most roundabout method.

[bodiebill]

Firewall for Loudspeakers?

Not just for loudspeakers...

 

 

Not only is it now much easier to use my TakeT H2, but it has never sounded so good, with the added benefits of the Fidelium cables and lelofiwa's.

[yamamoto2002]

 

 

The skin effect simulation, solid copper wire and stranded copper wire.

 

 

 

 

[Blake]

On 3/24/2022 at 9:24 AM, bodiebill said:

For instance, the function of these barrels could easily be built into a loudspeaker, or into a loudspeaker wire. Then we would just praise these products without realizing their added complexity.

 

 

 

I haven't posted here on the forums for a long while, but hey, looks like this thread finally has a bit of life and, not surprisingly, some controversy.  All good.  I don't mind it when people have different viewpoints than my own (unless they are obnoxious about it).  I try to be open minded, but at the end I trust my ears, otherwise, I wouldn't be in this hobby.

 

I see I am not the only one who tried this product and noticed a very obvious difference.  Nobody is forcing anyone to buy the Firewalls, we are just providing our subjective opinions.  For those open minded enough to give them a shot, I would encourage you to do so.  You may really enjoy the sonic contribution.  You might want to check my original post for the demo program I used.

 

With respect to @bodiebillcomment above, Boenicke incorporates these firewalls in its speakers (for an upcharge).

 

Anyway, back to work and I hope all of you are safe and well.

 

P.S. I see @bodiebillbought the Fidelium speaker cables.  I bought some myself.  Very impressed. 

 

 

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

On 3/23/2022 at 10:50 PM, fas42 said:

 

Yes, the electronics "bible", The Art of Electronics ... specifically in the chapter on noise and interference, one of the examples of a "gotcha",

 

 

Now, replace opamp with audio power amp, and ...

 

So I got curious that something out of an electronic handbook would have been missed by amplifier manufacturers. I asked a trusted (audio engineer) source and got this reply:

 

"Most amplifiers with global feedback already have a built-in "protection" in the form of a dampened choke (air core choke in parallel with a damping resistor) to "isolate" the amplifier output from unwanted high capacitive loading and strong RF interference.

Without such output circuit, the global feedback loop could become unstable (oscillations) when connecting high capacitive loads (braided speaker cable) or when the speaker interlinks are exposed to strong RF fields."

 

So the effectiveness of the Lessloss, DNM and similar add-ons could be dependant on the amplifier used (in my case there is no feedback loop, for example). Also, when applicable, similar results could perhaps be obtained (at a fraction of the cost) by adding clip-on ferrites to the speaker cables. 

 

Food for thought...

 

[fas42]

21 minutes ago, hopkins said:

 

"Most amplifiers with global feedback already have a built-in "protection" in the form of a dampened choke (air core choke in parallel with a damping resistor) to "isolate" the amplifier output from unwanted high capacitive loading and strong RF interference.

Without such output circuit, the global feedback loop could become unstable (oscillations) when connecting high capacitive loads (braided speaker cable) or when the speaker interlinks are exposed to strong RF fields."

 

Yes, there is that simple circuit addition - but how well was it implemented, how carefully was it tested to ensure that there were no audible consequences? One thing about RF, it always seems to squeeze through some tiny crack in the defenses, .

 

BTW, it's "damped", not "dampened" - the latter means adding water .

 

21 minutes ago, hopkins said:

So the effectiveness of the Lessloss, DNM and similar add-ons could be dependant on the amplifier used (in my case there is no feedback loop, for example). Also, when applicable, similar results could perhaps be obtained (at a fraction of the cost) by adding clip-on ferrites to the speaker cables. 

 

Food for thought...

 

 

Very much so ... there's no such thing as a universal tweak; one thing one can guarantee, is that a particular mod will make no difference, or in fact make SQ worse for some systems - no matter how positive the results are for many people. With audio, it's always, suck it and see ...

 

Be particular with stuff like clip-on ferrites - unless you do this very precisely, you may in fact add noise, from material interactions; ferrites work for me, but I take great care with exactly how they're added.

 

 

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

Another takeaway from this discussion (and more specifically what I just quoted above) is that once again the "lack of audability" argument advanced systematically by the likes of Amir of ASR or Archimago may be too simplistic. Witnesses this video about the topic at hand:

 

 

 

[fas42]

First time I've come across, Danny - and, this video is about as perfect an exposition about this whole shemozzle as I've come across on YT - I would be hard pressed to disagree with a single thing he says ...

 

 

I would suggest that some people put it on repeat, and watch it, say, 20 times, to properly soak up what he says, 

[yamamoto2002]

5 hours ago, fas42 said:

I would suggest that some people put it on repeat, and watch it, say, 20 times, to properly soak up what he says, 

 

I watched the video. From my experience, always there is some measurable differences. But I do not know weight values of each metrics that correlates to perceived audible difference. Maybe it is nonlinear and needs neural network rather than linear operation to generate Q value. 

 

Edit: IIRC there is some research in loudspeakers by Sean Olive, automated loudspeaker quality estimation using what hi-fi score.

 

 

 

 

[yamamoto2002]

It is possible RF interference causes audible noise on hi-fi stereo system. I read somewhere, on 10+ years ago, long haul trucks use illegally powerful transceiver to communicate to their office. On the households near trunk lines, loudspeakers talk spontaneously even when amplifier is turned off. I searched internet with keywords "トラック 違法無線 聞こえる" and found several examples.

[Confused]

10 hours ago, fas42 said:

I would suggest that some people put it on repeat, and watch it, say, 20 times, to properly soak up what he says, 

Would it not be a better use of time to listen to it once and hear him repeat the same thing 20 times?

[fas42]

Tsk, tsk ...

[bodiebill]

6 hours ago, yamamoto2002 said:

Maybe it is nonlinear and needs neural network rather than linear operation to generate Q value.

 

I like it how you try to create a bridge between the objectivists and the subjectivists, who mostly (and also in this thread) tend to be at cross purposes.

[Qhwoeprktiyns]

4 minutes ago, bodiebill said:

 

I like it how you try to create a bridge between the objectivists and the subjectivists, who mostly (and also in this thread) tend to be at cross purposes.

 

The word "objectivist" should be banned from any discussion on AudiophileStyle as it has become meaningless!

 

To get back to the topic at hand, there is potentially no contradiction between the "engineering" explanations provided (various RF HF frequencies potentially influencing the amplifier), the solution provided (limiting HF frequencies from reaching the amplifier through various techniques, wether DNM's or LessLoss's) and the "subjective" impression from listening results.

 

The universality of the solution is something that can be questioned, and therefore a "trial" is recommended before purchasing them, as was suggested already by the OP.

 

Moreover, when listening, you cannot rule out that the addition of the LessLoss has other effects as well.

[bodiebill]

11 minutes ago, hopkins said:

The word "objectivist" should be banned from any discussion on AudiophileStyle as it has become meaningless!

 

I just tried to make the distinction between those who say "I love what I hear but I do not know how it works" and those who say "I have not heard this component but science says it cannot work so you are imagining things".

How would you call these two mindsets?