Final Photos and Final Testing, stereo 6005 SE DC amp from 2021

[arj]

Folks please take it easy. its just an amp and no one will get a nobel prize for proving or disproving it.

Drlowmu please stick to your amp design and not drag the rest of the worlds design or knowledge into this
Others: it is his thread and his amp and better to keep it limited to technical discussions and report if you feel there is an issue

Have deleted some content and posts.

 

[Hari Iyer]

Don't try to make me the bad guy here. The moderators reinstated your membership here as well as allowing you to start this thread on the promise there would be no more bashing of people or established theory. You have no scientific research to back up your claims. The fact that one of your loyal and devoted followers tried your suggestions and reported positive results does not rule out placebo effect.

It's quite OK to announce what you hear and for others here to do the same. But to use that as a ticket to belittle 100 years of formal electrical engineering knowledge is not OK. As you admittedly lack the electronics theory to thoroughly evaluate this phenomenon you hear, the next logical step is for you to embrace the knowledge of the engineering community to study further and potentially find a plausible clause. Instead you would rather claim we are narrowly educated idiots because we ask for scientific data to support YOUR findings. That's not a good way to enlist our help.

Who the heck are to make judgement about what i heard or it was a placebo. Just because your two ears can't hear them does not mean it's placebo. So does it mean that all that you are saying is true and i am dumb. I also can say the same about you

 

[RtoR King]

Who the heck are to make judgement about what i heard or it was a placebo. Just because your two ears can't hear them does not mean it's placebo. So does it mean that all that you are saying is true and i am dumb. I also can say the same about you

I said "doesn't rule out placebo". I also said this need more investigation. Just because you hear something does not make it scientific fact. All I am saying is what you hear goes against 100 year electrical engineering principles. Therefore calling this a revelation such as Mr. Lowmu implies, is hardly appropriate without more data.

 

[Gudebrod audio]

Don't try to make me the bad guy here. The moderators reinstated your membership here as well as allowing you to start this thread on the promise there would be no more bashing of people or established theory. You have no scientific research to back up your claims. The fact that one of your loyal and devoted followers tried your suggestions and reported positive results does not rule out placebo effect.

It's quite OK to announce what you hear and for others here to do the same. But to use that as a ticket to belittle 100 years of formal electrical engineering knowledge is not OK. As you admittedly lack the electronics theory to thoroughly evaluate this phenomenon you hear, the next logical step is for you to embrace the knowledge of the engineering community to study further and potentially find a plausible clause. Instead you would rather claim we are narrowly educated idiots because we ask for scientific data to support YOUR findings. That's not a good way to enlist our help.

I would ask do you have the ability to measure these changes? If so can you perform this process and let us know your results?

 

[RtoR King]

I would ask do you have the ability to measure these changes? If so can you perform this process and let us know your results?

The plausible effects of swapping tube AC filament wires would be an increase or decrease in hum. And in a power amp that would imply a defective tube with an Hk short. In a phono preamp, this technique may have some merit. But again only with hum levels.

The attributes being reported are the classic audiophile non-measurable characteristics. Stuff like "sound stage, micro dynamics, instrument separation, etc". But today we do have a modern measurement technique that can be highly accurate with a before/after test.

Capture a musical sequence into a Digital Audio Workstation, DAW. Today that can be a PC with a good sound card and some free software. Capture through the speaker terminals via a simple resistor pad. We capture files of the same sequence with each filament wire swap. Then do a binary compare. If the result comes back with variations at or below the noise floor, then they are for listening purposes identical. Waveform superimposition is also a good way to compare the files.

Now for those who will say the DAW is not accurate enough to resolve the differences, I ask how then is digital audio even possible? Because a DAW was used in the mastering process of any CD, SACD, whatever. If the digital audio technology cannot resolve the differences, then how was that level of resolution recorded digitally in the first place on the CD or whatever digital format you are using as a test sequence?

And for the analog recording argument, sonic preferences aside, digital audio does have much more dynamic range than RIAA equalized analog recordings. That is an easily proven fact. And one of the claims made was an increase in dynamics. So an analog playback, even the 1812 overture, will be well within the dynamic range of a DAW.

But a much simpler test can be done with a scope. Short the amp input jack and open the scope gain to see residual hum on the amp output. Now swap filament wires and see if the residual hum level changes. But keep in mind the limits of our hearing within your listening environment. Like the acoustic noise floor of the room. If the change is below that, then it's not audible.

Folks please take it easy. its just an amp and no one will get a nobel prize for proving or disproving it.

Drlowmu please stick to your amp design and not drag the rest of the worlds design or knowledge into this
Others: it is his thread and his amp and better to keep it limited to technical discussions and report if you feel there is an issue

Have deleted some content and posts.

Great advice and direction.

Here is what I did.
Here are the listening results and possibly some measured data.
This is what I think is happening, or know is happening if you can provide scientifically repeatable evidence.

But enough of this:
No amp builder has ever done this! (how would you know that?)
All amps to date are sub standard! (did you test and inspect them all?)
EEs and technology educated people are narrow minded and not creative! (That's sour grapes from somebody who can't understand the technology at play)
The only world authority in amplifier design is in Montana! (Really, where else is that officially documented? This is a personal opinion, nothing more.)

 

[drlowmu]

05-11-2022 ............... " I I A C P O " .................................Now, the Fourth CORROBORATION


I sent this HFV thread to respectable SE tube amplifier builders in the USA, and received a fourth email return - corroboration - to share with anyone .

. I was pleased to get this email back . A person of few words. :



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Next, we need a couple of HFV FMs in INDIA, ( who run well-set-up high efficiency speakers with their own DIY SE high - performance tube amps ), to represent the amazing country of India...... in this design topic. ( In addition to Hari ).

It is several hours of fun work, listening , A-Bing on one's own resolving audio system, with a soldering iron and two insulated clip leads.

Note, one must have a repeatable high resolution signal source and an excellent hi fi system, to make foolproof determinations in this amplifier optimizing. In each instance, it will be obvious which individual internal AC phase orientation is better. They all, individually and collectively, add up !!!! ( To a smile on your face . )

Interestingly, Hari reports having to use his Vinyl as a source to hear it, and not his BluRay player.


The proof is in the pudding.

Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

05-11-2022 ............... " I I A C P O " .................................Now, the Fourth CORROBORATION


I sent this HFV thread to respectable SE tube amplifier builders in the USA, and received a fourth email return - corroboration - to share with anyone .

Presently, I estimate the " I I A C P O " subject is unknown to 99.999 percent of the audio world, as one can very easily deduce from this thread. I was pleased to get this email back . A person of few words. :

View attachment 69260

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Next, we need a couple of HFV FMs in INDIA, ( who run well-set-up high efficiency speakers with their own DIY SE high - performance tube amps ), to represent the amazing country of India...... in this design topic. ( In addition to Hari ).

It is several hours of fun work, listening , A-Bing on one's own resolving audio system, with a soldering iron and two insulated clip leads.

Note, one must have a repeatable high resolution signal source and an excellent hi fi system, to make foolproof determinations in this amplifier optimizing. In each instance, it will be obvious which individual internal AC phase orientation is better. They all, individually and collectively, add up !!!! ( To a smile on your face . )

Interestingly, Hari reports having to use his Vinyl as a source to hear it, and not his BluRay player.

I giggle to myself at the various types and amount of " push back " exhibited herein with " I I A C P O ". Those who took the time and listened, certainly do know what was heard !!! We learn things, new things !! Best wishes to all.

The proof is in the pudding.

Jeff

For whatever reason, there is something that has been going on in this thread and/or in this forum that I have missed. Specifically, I am referring to the "types and amount of push back" to which you are referring. So, if it wouldn't be too much of an imposition I'd appreciate it if you would quote some of the push back that you believe that you have been receiving, and provide references to the posts to this thread and/or this forum that contain the sort of push back that you are alleging.

 

[Gudebrod audio]

The plausible effects of swapping tube AC filament wires would be an increase or decrease in hum. And in a power amp that would imply a defective tube with an Hk short. In a phono preamp, this technique may have some merit. But again only with hum levels.

The attributes being reported are the classic audiophile non-measurable characteristics. Stuff like "sound stage, micro dynamics, instrument separation, etc". But today we do have a modern measurement technique that can be highly accurate with a before/after test.

Capture a musical sequence into a Digital Audio Workstation, DAW. Today that can be a PC with a good sound card and some free software. Capture through the speaker terminals via a simple resistor pad. We capture files of the same sequence with each filament wire swap. Then do a binary compare. If the result comes back with variations at or below the noise floor, then they are for listening purposes identical. Waveform superimposition is also a good way to compare the files.

Now for those who will say the DAW is not accurate enough to resolve the differences, I ask how then is digital audio even possible? Because a DAW was used in the mastering process of any CD, SACD, whatever. If the digital audio technology cannot resolve the differences, then how was that level of resolution recorded digitally in the first place on the CD or whatever digital format you are using as a test sequence?

And for the analog recording argument, sonic preferences aside, digital audio does have much more dynamic range than RIAA equalized analog recordings. That is an easily proven fact. And one of the claims made was an increase in dynamics. So an analog playback, even the 1812 overture, will be well within the dynamic range of a DAW.

But a much simpler test can be done with a scope. Short the amp input jack and open the scope gain to see residual hum on the amp output. Now swap filament wires and see if the residual hum level changes. But keep in mind the limits of our hearing within your listening environment. Like the acoustic noise floor of the room. If the change is below that, then it's not audible.

Thanks for the info, I apply it on my next build. But I thought you might want to try it and report back as mine is already done. Your findings and measurements would be great contribution.

 

[drlowmu]

Thanks for the info, I apply it on my next build. But I thought you might want to try it and report back as mine is already done. Your findings and measurements would be great contribution.

Gudebroad,

Well, we are not just talking about hum as a result of low voltage ( 5.0, 6.3 or 12.6 VAC ) filament AC orientations.

As you most likely heard when you followed the step by step instructions of the 3-5-22 post ( " The Last 1% " ) , the main Power Transformer's high voltage AC supply, feeding the rectifiers, is also importantly, BY EAR, in need of AC optimizing.

I suspect much of this has to do with how various power transformers are wound internally.

Honestly, I personally don't care too much about knowing or proving scientific or theoretical reasons.

Self-discovering ( in 2019, with the KT88 SE DC amp ) and now knowing that the " I I A C P O " procedure begs to be done, to get any good amplifier circuit to perform the best in my living room, is what ( and all ) " I " really need to know !!!

It is precisely as SCOTT pointed out, with so few words, in an above-post's email, which I showed you all..

Thank you sir, for your important contributions here - and for independently TRYING out the AC procedures.

Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

I’ve also learned the exact same thing from Jeff. Weird, but it’s true this on my KT120seul mono block build. I then proceeded to do the same testing on my preamp that has 3 transformers in it. Simply amazing at which the clarity and stage became so much more accurate, everything Hari describes is true a solid adjustment. Thanks Jeff for sharing! Others just need to try it and listen.

I’ve also learned the exact same thing from Jeff. Weird, but it’s true this on my KT120seul mono block build. I then proceeded to do the same testing on my preamp that has 3 transformers in it. Simply amazing at which the clarity and stage became so much more accurate, everything Hari describes is true a solid adjustment. Thanks Jeff for sharing! Others just need to try it and listen.

Assuming that your preamp is stereo, what are the functions of the three transformers, and does it utilize totally separate power supplies for the right and left channels?

Gudebroad,
Well, we are not just talking about hum as a result of low voltage ( 5.0, 6.3 or 12.6 VAC ) filament AC orientations.

As you most likely heard when you followed the step by step instructions of the 3-5-22 post ( " The Last 1% " ) , the main Power Transformer's high voltage AC supply, feeding the rectifiers, is also importantly, BY EAR, in need of AC optimizing.

I suspect much of this has to do with how various power transformers are wound internally.

Honestly, I personally don't care too much about knowing or proving scientific or theoretical reasons.

Self-discovering ( in 2019, with the KT88 SE DC amp ) and now knowing that the " I I A C P O " procedure begs to be done, to get any good amplifier circuit to perform the best in my living room, is what ( and all ) " I " really need to know !!!

It is precisely as SCOTT pointed out, with so few words, in an above-post's email, which I showed you all..

Thank you sir, for your important contributions here - and for independently TRYING out the AC procedures.

Jeff

You have often said that we all listen to modulated power supplies. While that is not universally true, it is certainly true for you and others who build tube amplifiers that contain unregulated or poorly regulated power supplies. Now, one of the consequences of unregulated or poorly regulated power supplies that is generally overlooked is the multiplicity of signal feedback paths that exist when multiple power transformers are used. For example, because power transformers are wide band and bidirectional, audio signal variations that are present on high-current B+ lines will be coupled through the high-voltage transformer to its primary and to the AC line to which it is connected. These audio signal variations will also be coupled via the common AC line connection to the secondary of a filament transformer and will be applied directly to the filament of the low-level, high-gain input tube. Depending on the polarity of the transformer connection to the AC line, this feedback path can be either positive or negative. Consequently, if the existence of fed-back audio signal variations on the filament of a high-gain input tube can affect the sound of an amplifier, then one should not be surprised if the polarity of that feedback signal can also affect the sound of that amplifier. Obviously, the use of a hard-regulated filament voltage would eliminate this feedback loop and whatever sonic effects that it my have.

Thanks for the info, I apply it on my next build. But I thought you might want to try it and report back as mine is already done. Your findings and measurements would be great contribution.

Am I missing something, or is your flippant and sarcastic reply nothing other than a slap in the face of another member of this forum who prepared and posted a thoughtful reply to the measurement question that you asked? Perhaps one of the moderators would care to weight in on this and let both of us know if his impression of your reply differs from mine, and if not let you know in no uncertain terms that you are out of line and need to clean up your act.

Folks please take it easy. its just an amp and no one will get a nobel prize for proving or disproving it.

Drlowmu please stick to your amp design and not drag the rest of the worlds design or knowledge into this
Others: it is his thread and his amp and better to keep it limited to technical discussions and report if you feel there is an issue

Have deleted some content and posts.

When attacked, children go crying to their mother. When attacked, adults fight back. Acordingly, the next time that Mr.Lowmu makes false statements about me or what have posted, you can expect me to call him out on it, as opposed to complaining to you and hoping that you might do something about it. My two cents.

 

[mbhangui]

Now, one of the consequences of unregulated or poorly regulated power supplies that is generally overlooked is the multiplicity of signal feedback paths that exist when multiple power transformers are used. For example, because power transformers are wide band and bidirectional, audio signal variations that are present on high-current B+ lines will be coupled through the high-voltage transformer to its primary and to the AC line to which it is connected. These audio signal variations will also be coupled via the common AC line connection to the secondary of a filament transformer and will be applied directly to the filament of the low-level, high-gain input tube. Depending on the polarity of the transformer connection to the AC line, this feedback path can be either positive or negative. Consequently, if the existence of fed-back audio signal variations on the filament of a high-gain input tube can affect the sound of an amplifier, then one should not be surprised if the polarity of that feedback signal can also affect the sound of that amplifier. Obviously, the use of a hard-regulated filament voltage would eliminate this feedback loop and whatever sonic effects that it my have.

I was wondering why this could be happening. This is a perfect logical explanation devoid of any vodoo and a good explanation of what is happening behind the scene. I really learnt something from this explanation today.

 

[Dr.Gary]

I was wondering why this could be happening. This is a perfect logical explanation devoid of any vodoo and a good explanation of what is happening behind the scene. I really learnt something from this explanation today.

Right now, it's just a hypothesis, albeit a definitely viable one that deserves to be tested. But that is not likely going to happen because the outcome is potentially problematic for the voodoo practitioners. That's because the sonic result of breaking the transformer-transformer feedback loops may result in a third sonic outcome that is less desirable than the two polarity-dependent outcomes that exist when the feedback paths are present. In that case the voodoo practitioners would have to acknowledge the equivalent of saying that they prefer the sound of either capacitor A or capacitor B rather than the sound of no capacitor at all.

 

[Hari Iyer]

The plausible effects of swapping tube AC filament wires would be an increase or decrease in hum. And in a power amp that would imply a defective tube with an Hk short. In a phono preamp, this technique may have some merit. But again only with hum levels.

The attributes being reported are the classic audiophile non-measurable characteristics. Stuff like "sound stage, micro dynamics, instrument separation, etc". But today we do have a modern measurement technique that can be highly accurate with a before/after test.

Capture a musical sequence into a Digital Audio Workstation, DAW. Today that can be a PC with a good sound card and some free software. Capture through the speaker terminals via a simple resistor pad. We capture files of the same sequence with each filament wire swap. Then do a binary compare. If the result comes back with variations at or below the noise floor, then they are for listening purposes identical. Waveform superimposition is also a good way to compare the files.

Now for those who will say the DAW is not accurate enough to resolve the differences, I ask how then is digital audio even possible? Because a DAW was used in the mastering process of any CD, SACD, whatever. If the digital audio technology cannot resolve the differences, then how was that level of resolution recorded digitally in the first place on the CD or whatever digital format you are using as a test sequence?

And for the analog recording argument, sonic preferences aside, digital audio does have much more dynamic range than RIAA equalized analog recordings. That is an easily proven fact. And one of the claims made was an increase in dynamics. So an analog playback, even the 1812 overture, will be well within the dynamic range of a DAW.

But a much simpler test can be done with a scope. Short the amp input jack and open the scope gain to see residual hum on the amp output. Now swap filament wires and see if the residual hum level changes. But keep in mind the limits of our hearing within your listening environment. Like the acoustic noise floor of the room. If the change is below that, then it's not audible.

It seems you have not tried swapping the AC filaments and reporting out of your imagination or theorotical knowledge. That's the reason you are at a big disadvantage than less learnt people like me. To begin with my KT88 amplifier has zero hum and for me swapping of AC filaments were not meant for reducing or adding hum. I can only explain this with an analogy about fluid mechanics - I may be 100% wrong - but again I am not claiming to be an expert here -

Suppose you have one stream of water flowing through a hallow pipe say 5 meters long. You connect one more pipe at say 2 meters tangent to it (or opposite to it). When the two streams meet at the junction there would be turbulence and disturbance in the flow. Imagine instead of tangential ( or opposite ) direction if the pipes were connected in the same stream of flow, then at the junction there would be a less turbulent flow and there would be less disturbance.

Imagine same with the tubes - if the filament is heated with say a 0 deg phase then the emitted electrons will flow in one direction - now if in a second tube the electrons are flowing with a 180 deg opposite phase then there would be turbulence in the junction causing smearing and dynamic loss.

The AC filament alignment helps to have all the electrons emitted to flow in the same direction instead of challenging each other due to opposing emission from their filament.

Suggest you to try once and report - hum was never an issue before an after I did this.

 

[drlowmu]

It seems you have not tried swapping the AC filaments and reporting out of your imagination or theorotical knowledge. That's the reason you are at a big disadvantage than less learnt people like me. To begin with my KT88 amplifier has zero hum and for me swapping of AC filaments were not meant for reducing or adding hum. I can only explain this with an analogy about fluid mechanics - I may be 100% wrong - but again I am not claiming to be an expert here -

Suppose you have one stream of water flowing through a hallow pipe say 5 meters long. You connect one more pipe at say 2 meters tangent to it (or opposite to it). When the two streams meet at the junction there would be turbulence and disturbance in the flow. Imagine instead of tangential ( or opposite ) direction if the pipes were connected in the same stream of flow, then at the junction there would be a less turbulent flow and there would be less disturbance.

Imagine same with the tubes - if the filament is heated with say a 0 deg phase then the emitted electrons will flow in one direction - now if in a second tube the electrons are flowing with a 180 deg opposite phase then there would be turbulence in the junction causing smearing and dynamic loss.

The AC filament alignment helps to have all the electrons emitted to flow in the same direction instead of challenging each other due to opposing emission from their filament.

Suggest you to try once and report - hum was never an issue before an after I did this.

Hari,

Nice analogy, particularly after you personally experiencing this with your monoblocks, with your ears, just a few weeks ago.

Perhaps one important thing.............. you have left out.

Your KT88 amp ( all my amp designs, and most likely, Scott's ) use ZERO negative feedback. It SMASHES anyone's HFV posted hypothesis 100% !!!! ( As far as negative feedback being a mechanism. )

Can anyone spot a negative feedback loop?, Look :

New Design, SE 6005 Directly Coupled Audio Amplifier

This is a current design and build project, a DIY hobby of mine for many years. It uses a 6005 FINALS tube, which has a 10 Watt (correction - 12 Watt) plate dissipation, and was introduced in the 1950s. Used in car radios and TVs as the FINAL stage, in the USA and in Russia ( an equivalent )...

www.hifivision.com

Hari, do you see any NFB in your KT88 amp's schematic ........ ???

However,........ importantly, I certainly liked your water pipe analogy.

LOL. Who in this world, who KNOWS what they are doing, would ever design a tube amp with negative feedback ?? Pity them.

In audio design, there absolutely IS ........................ no free lunch. Understood ?

Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

Hari,

Nice analogy, after you personally experiencing this, by your ear, a few weeks ago.

Perhaps the most important thing you have left out.

Your KT88 amp ( and all my amps, and most likely, Scott's ) use ZERO negative feedback. It SMASHES the mis-hypothesis 100% !!!! ( As far as negative feedback being a mechanism. )

Does anyone spot a negative feedback loop here?, Look :

New Design, SE 6005 Directly Coupled Audio Amplifier

This is a current design and build project, a DIY hobby of mine for many years. It uses a 6005 FINALS tube, which has a 10 Watt (correction - 12 Watt) plate dissipation, and was introduced in the 1950s. Used in car radios and TVs as the FINAL stage, in the USA and in Russia ( an equivalent )...

www.hifivision.com

Hari, do you see NFB in your KT88 amp's schematic ........ ???

However, I certainly liked your analogy.

Who in this world, who KNOWS what they are doing, would ever design a tube amp with negative feedback ? Well, come to think of it, there always IS a certain type of individual I suppose. Pity them all. The unacceptable ( to me ) "cure ".

In audio design, as in life, there absolutely IS ........................ no free lunch.

Jeff

I hate to break the bad news to you and your followers, but the amps to which you refer have multiple feedback loops via the common connection that the primaries of the multiple bidirectional transformers have to the AC power line. Based on the schematic that you show, that is a clearly evident and indispitable fact. Whether the feedback associated with any specific transformer-transformer feedback loop is positive or negative depends on the polarity of the connection the associated transformer to the AC power line.

 

[drlowmu]

Why has " virtually everyone " in the audio world been unaware of this ( " I I A C P O " ) up until 2019 ??? ( Over 100 years . )

And brought up first and only by Jeff - on HFV , this year ??? ( 03-05-2022 ).

And when will other talented DIYers, in India and around this world, proceed to execute this amplifier and preamplifier optimization on their own, to permanently improve their own music listening experience ???

How about all of the audio Manufacturers ?????????????

We all live and we learn.


Jeff

 

[Dr.Gary]

Why has " virtually everyone " in the audio world been unaware of this ( " I I A C P O " ) up until 2019 ??? ( Over 100 years . )

And brought up first and only by Jeff - on HFV , this year ??? ( 03-05-2022 ).

And when will other talented DIYers, in India and around this world, proceed to execute this amplifier and preamplifier optimization on their own, to permanently improve their music listening experience ???

How about all the audio Manufacturers ?????????????

We live and we learn.


Jeff

In my opinion, the place to start down the road toward optimization would be to eliminate the numerous transformer-transformer feedback loops that are present in the schematic that you show.

It seems you have not tried swapping the AC filaments and reporting out of your imagination or theorotical knowledge. That's the reason you are at a big disadvantage than less learnt people like me. To begin with my KT88 amplifier has zero hum and for me swapping of AC filaments were not meant for reducing or adding hum. I can only explain this with an analogy about fluid mechanics - I may be 100% wrong - but again I am not claiming to be an expert here -

Suppose you have one stream of water flowing through a hallow pipe say 5 meters long. You connect one more pipe at say 2 meters tangent to it (or opposite to it). When the two streams meet at the junction there would be turbulence and disturbance in the flow. Imagine instead of tangential ( or opposite ) direction if the pipes were connected in the same stream of flow, then at the junction there would be a less turbulent flow and there would be less disturbance.

Imagine same with the tubes - if the filament is heated with say a 0 deg phase then the emitted electrons will flow in one direction - now if in a second tube the electrons are flowing with a 180 deg opposite phase then there would be turbulence in the junction causing smearing and dynamic loss.

The AC filament alignment helps to have all the electrons emitted to flow in the same direction instead of challenging each other due to opposing emission from their filament.

Suggest you to try once and report - hum was never an issue before an after I did this.

If there is a testable hypothesis buried within your speculations, it would be beneficial to all if someone would be kind enough to point it out.

 

[grindstone]

Appreciate the breadcrumbs, but I'm a hobbiest/diy'er and I just don't have the education/skills/experience to do the proper experimental design. Even if I did, the price of the knowledge gained from the experimentation is prohibitive unless someone gets on a personal "thing" and Has To Know, etc. I don't have one and theirs are already built and they already have good results so they really need not care save for curiosity. In a particular way, there's a "method". Might not be yours or mine, but it increased their satisfaction with their rigs. Further, from my chair, there's just so much going on in there that trying to get to the bottom of the interactions would be a (too?) large undertaking.

Before you posted about what couples through primary-sides, I was thinking it was about winding starts/finishes, floating frames, and a sort of ferrous chassis induced eddy-current extravaganza. I also know it's deeper than that but I just don't have the chops to break it all down into the pieces (or know how much of what piece matters at what freqs).

I never doubt that people Hear something (and I can separate peoples delivery & causality theories from their results pretty easily). Additionally, I very-much value the project threads and listening reports and the interchange. This is all good stuff and I'll take any education I can get from anybody, but I'm a passenger on this thread.

Say your stick bench supplies on each stage--well that's not the same amp. Say you sub batteries for the rails and the heaters (somehow)--again it's not the same amp. Any reductionist application of those seems equally meaningless/inapplicable.

Say (hypothetical/thought) you get all the PT's shielded--does that rule out E-fields? Maybe reduces their impact in those spots, but there's still all the wiring--maybe parasitics change so it impacts what gets through but what does that mean? Seriously, how do I look at that--try to figure out equivalent source and loads in isolation & sweep a device at a time and get impedance and phase and then what?

Say (again thought experiment) you feed each existing power transformer with it's own constant voltage transformer or generator or something that changes line/source "stuff" and that something is different--I don't know enough to even now how to set that up or how to interpret that. I mean, what's the source resistance at a wall outlet and how far backwards/upstream do you go? Or do you do the simplest first--like ideal transformers and voltage and current sources or something and then keep adding device detail? I'm sincerely inquiring--I just can't get my head around it all.

Everything I can quickly think-up to test isn't really testing what's there but trying to isolate pieces that seem far-afield or otherwise incomplete. This is why we have EE's It's also why the rest of us are relegated to "just try stuff" (and keep it as simple as we can).

It's an amp--nothing is personal and I'm grateful to this place for supporting discussion.

 

[Dr.Gary]

Appreciate the breadcrumbs, but I'm a hobbiest/diy'er and I just don't have the education/skills/experience to do the proper experimental design. Even if I did, the price of the knowledge gained from the experimentation is prohibitive unless someone gets on a personal "thing" and Has To Know, etc. I don't have one and theirs are already built and they already have good results so they really need not care save for curiosity. In a particular way, there's a "method". Might not be yours or mine, but it increased their satisfaction with their rigs. Further, from my chair, there's just so much going on in there that trying to get to the bottom of the interactions would be a (too?) large undertaking.

Before you posted about what couples through primary-sides, I was thinking it was about winding starts/finishes, floating frames, and a sort of ferrous chassis induced eddy-current extravaganza. I also know it's deeper than that but I just don't have the chops to break it all down into the pieces (or know how much of what piece matters at what freqs).

I never doubt that people Hear something (and I can separate peoples delivery & causality theories from their results pretty easily). Additionally, I very-much value the project threads and listening reports and the interchange. This is all good stuff and I'll take any education I can get from anybody, but I'm a passenger on this thread.

Say your stick bench supplies on each stage--well that's not the same amp. Say you sub batteries for the rails and the heaters (somehow)--again it's not the same amp. Any reductionist application of those seems equally meaningless/inapplicable.

Say (hypothetical/thought) you get all the PT's shielded--does that rule out E-fields? Maybe reduces their impact in those spots, but there's still all the wiring--maybe parasitics change so it impacts what gets through but what does that mean? Seriously, how do I look at that--try to figure out equivalent source and loads in isolation & sweep a device at a time and get impedance and phase and then what?

Say (again thought experiment) you feed each existing power transformer with it's own constant voltage transformer or generator or something that changes line/source "stuff" and that something is different--I don't know enough to even now how to set that up or how to interpret that. I mean, what's the source resistance at a wall outlet and how far backwards/upstream do you go? Or do you do the simplest first--like ideal transformers and voltage and current sources or something and then keep adding device detail? I'm sincerely inquiring--I just can't get my head around it all.

Everything I can quickly think-up to test isn't really testing what's there but trying to isolate pieces that seem far-afield or otherwise incomplete. This is why we have EE's It's also why the rest of us are relegated to "just try stuff" (and keep it as simple as we can).

It's an amp--nothing is personal and I'm grateful to this place for supporting discussion.

You state "This is all good stuff and I'll take any education I can get from anybody......."
While there is certainly some "good stuff" here and elsewhere, don't expect to get much in the way of education from the voodoo practitioners.

 

[drlowmu]

Appreciate the breadcrumbs, but I'm a hobbiest/diy'er and I just don't have the education/skills/experience to do the proper experimental design. Even if I did, the price of the knowledge gained from the experimentation is prohibitive unless someone gets on a personal "thing" and Has To Know, etc. I don't have one and theirs are already built and they already have good results so they really need not care save for curiosity. In a particular way, there's a "method". Might not be yours or mine, but it increased their satisfaction with their rigs. Further, from my chair, there's just so much going on in there that trying to get to the bottom of the interactions would be a (too?) large undertaking.

Before you posted about what couples through primary-sides, I was thinking it was about winding starts/finishes, floating frames, and a sort of ferrous chassis induced eddy-current extravaganza. I also know it's deeper than that but I just don't have the chops to break it all down into the pieces (or know how much of what piece matters at what freqs).

I never doubt that people Hear something (and I can separate peoples delivery & causality theories from their results pretty easily). Additionally, I very-much value the project threads and listening reports and the interchange. This is all good stuff and I'll take any education I can get from anybody, but I'm a passenger on this thread.

Say your stick bench supplies on each stage--well that's not the same amp. Say you sub batteries for the rails and the heaters (somehow)--again it's not the same amp. Any reductionist application of those seems equally meaningless/inapplicable.

Say (hypothetical/thought) you get all the PT's shielded--does that rule out E-fields? Maybe reduces their impact in those spots, but there's still all the wiring--maybe parasitics change so it impacts what gets through but what does that mean? Seriously, how do I look at that--try to figure out equivalent source and loads in isolation & sweep a device at a time and get impedance and phase and then what?

Say (again thought experiment) you feed each existing power transformer with it's own constant voltage transformer or generator or something that changes line/source "stuff" and that something is different--I don't know enough to even now how to set that up or how to interpret that. I mean, what's the source resistance at a wall outlet and how far backwards/upstream do you go? Or do you do the simplest first--like ideal transformers and voltage and current sources or something and then keep adding device detail? I'm sincerely inquiring--I just can't get my head around it all.

Everything I can quickly think-up to test isn't really testing what's there but trying to isolate pieces that seem far-afield or otherwise incomplete. This is why we have EE's It's also why the rest of us are relegated to "just try stuff" (and keep it as simple as we can).

It's an amp--nothing is personal and I'm grateful to this place for supporting discussion. Hi Grindstone,

Hi Grindstone,

May I most humbly suggest - don't sweat the theory and "why " something is.

With two DECENT clip leads, CAREFULLY individually listen to internal AC variations, and permanently solder each " best sounding " AC orientation in place.

They cumulatively add in their goodness, on a good SE amp rig and speaker. Enjoy the result and share it here. Thanks.
Nice post above.

Jeff