| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » It’s mad, mad, mad... electricity. (* posts, 25 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 25 of 96 (1,911 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 23 24 25 26 27 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  What lives in Symmetric Sound?..  The beginning of our journey is ALWAYS symmetrical...  Audio Discussions  Forum     19  174397  05-28-2004
  »  New  Always check power-line polarity...  The Cost of Knowing...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     11  111780  07-10-2005
  »  New  RAAL “Water Drop” tweeter for Macondo...  Your comment takes me by surprise...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     77  922132  02-16-2007
  »  New  My feelings about new exciting audio products..  Vacuumstate...  Audio Discussions  Forum     25  263959  04-30-2007
  »  New  Musique Concrete horns..  These are now sold as Kornhent products...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     6  107915  06-12-2007
  »  New  Compression drivers and the “clean signal”...  The NEW “Compression drivers and the clean signal”....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     14  162910  07-12-2007
  »  New  Digi Redux; Drive 1 transport and iDAT-44+ DAC..  Confirmation and Relief...  Didital Things  Forum     26  229190  09-28-2007
  »  New  Metal domes..  Try the one Lansche is using...  Audio Discussions  Forum     6  78656  11-08-2007
  »  New  The power AC Outlets?..  Where to Pick Up the Gong?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     2  43051  10-31-2008
  »  New  The Avicenna's failure is the great Avicenna success!..  New life for Avicenna...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  83632  02-03-2009
  »  New  Internet and electricity..  Suboptimal. . ....  Didital Things  Forum     1  29236  01-07-2010
  »  New  Electricity... power strips and ac improvements..  Electricity... power strips and ac improvements...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  16628  03-30-2010
  »  New  Another example of energy..  System Warm up...  Audio Discussions  Forum     1910  9896154  01-29-2011
  »  New  I good spot-light for a turntable?..  Reply...  Analog Playback Forum     15  154215  10-24-2010
03-20-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
oxric
Posts 194
Joined on 02-11-2010

Post #: 481
Post ID: 13192
Reply to: 13190
The single "silver bullet" proposition, backed by some serious evidence no doubt?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 drdna wrote:
I think it has already been stated. Batteries in audio are inherently of limited utility. It is a tendency of audiophiles to dedicate themselves to a single "silver bullet" instead of building the system based on the particular needs and compromises involved. In the case of batteries, these are not perfect sources. Rather they are very real physical objects with their own physical problems restricting the flow of electricity in idiosyncratic ways. The conflict is that these issues will be more prominent in low signal applications, while in high current applications, the batteries would need to be so large as to make their use prohibitive for the home. This leaves the use of batteries limited, as Romy opined, to those systems plagued by such bad electricity that even this heavily compromised approach is an improvement.


Adrian


Adrian:

I fail to see the utility, as I have always done, of opinions, approaches or theories which make some dogmatic assumption based on limited experience with the said device. So for your opinion, which seems to deny that the Living Voice or the Red Wine Audio propositions have anything to offer, I take it that you must have tried these solutions and compared them maybe with solution(s) that in your view best addresses our dissatisfaction with the quality of mains electricity. I trust that this must be so, in the light of the opinions you express, and must therefore bend to your findings until I have the chance to do such a comparison myself, doubtful  as it is that I should ever get  the opportunity.

If that is not the case, then at the very least, you must have some experience of using battery power supplies in your system, maybe in the pre-amp you built, or even more extensively, and that's the basis for your opinion. In that case, I would suggest that this is  not a sufficient exposure based on which to form such an all-encompassing opinion. The only significant compromise you mention which is worthy of note relates to the 'restriction' on the flow of electricity. This is a matter of implementation and can be overcome. What about your other point, that batteries are 'not perfect sources'. One would need to do some substantial distortion to our understanding of a source to think of batteries as a source. So that leaves your third and final point, that they would be too large as to make their use prohibitive for the home. You home maybe, without trying to be impertinent or sarcastic in the least. Certainly prohibitive in my home, although a partial solution I envisage using in my system at the pre-amp stage will involve 75kg of batteries. But not necessarily out of proportion to the rest of a system such as Romy's, or somebody else who has the technical background, the inclination and the means.

I agree (who would not?) that such a heavy-handed solution must be used as a last resort, but can you guarantee a universal panacea, even merely an approach or solution easily accessible to all that is sure to address or alleviate problems with 'bad electricity'. No need to answer, I doubt you or anyone can or this thread would not be as long or as enduring as it has been. Adrian, for someone who waxes so lyrical about quantum mechanics though, I am perplexed by a view like yours which is so categorical, in spite of the complex issues involved which few would suggest they comprehend fully.

Now there is a long list of advantages to a battery based solution, even if only a partial one, that would enable one to power all or parts of one's system from batteries. I will not bore everyone or offend anybody's intelligence by enumerating the most obvious ones so I will stick to what are in my mind the most critical ones. Firstly, in cases where there are audible advantages to a battery based solution which makes sense from a cost perspective (that is does the expense involved give more improvement than spending an equivalent amount elsewhere in the system?), there is absolutely no reason not to give it a place in a system which is at this level invariably a combination of very many varied components. Secondly, and maybe for some more importantly even, however unsatisfactory the solution, it sets an absolute benchmark by which better and more practical solutions can be evaluated as and when they are tried at a later date. Thirdly,and this is more an issue for some, when you do have to move house, it is easier to preserve an irreducible core of performance below which the performance of a system should not fall, because of 'bad electricity'. 

I value my time and the cumulated wisdom of forum contributors here too highly to advocate a solution with marginal and intangible benefits but thus far nobody has advanced a specific complaint that shows a technical or other shortfall in a battery-powered solution which makes it one that deserves to be treated with contemptuous dismissal. I believe the problem is in part that Romy's system is, again, for obvious reasons (just imagine the amount of batteries it would take to power just his super Melquiades), inherently antagonistical to a battery-powered solution. Romy, in my mind, would only be able to rely partially on such a solution. But others, with more suitable systems, may be able to pursue such a solution and compare their notes here for the benefit or amusement of all. I would hope that as individualistic a character as Romy has not merely surrounded himself by a bunch of hangers-on contaminated by a herd mentality that make them mistrust their own intellectual faculties.

In brief, batteries are probably not for 99% of audiophiles, even those who frequent Romy's website. But for those of you willing to push the boundaries of what can be achieved a little bit further, do not let Romy's or Adrian's or anyone else's opinions or prejudices dissuade you from such a venture. When I look at Romy's monumental website, and when I think of his  own unique mammalian symbology, I cannot help but think of the Egyptian civilisation, which likewise venerated the cat (to the point of mummifying thousands of them ritualistically) and thought they were the repository of all worthwhile knowledge until the abysm of their arrogance engulfed them in a fire that led to their complete collapse. So be warned.

Regards
Rakesh

03-20-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 298
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 482
Post ID: 13193
Reply to: 13192
Hey Rakesh!
fiogf49gjkf0d
Thanks for an eminently sensible post -- one that could be inserted into almost any audio discussion thread! Especially:

I fail to see the utility... of opinions, approaches or theories which make some dogmatic assumption based on limited experience with the said device.

That sentence, a truism in form, has been honored repeatedly in the breach. One can only be amused at folks who talk about what they've not heard for themselves.

But here's an excellent insight, one new to me:

Thirdly,and this is more an issue for some, when you do have to move house, it is easier to preserve an irreducible core of performance below which the performance of a system should not fall, because of 'bad electricity'.
 
Yes. Keep as much constant as you can, over the experiment.

clark
03-20-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,131
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 483
Post ID: 13194
Reply to: 13192
It is all bout faulty methodology of assessment.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Rakesh,

I think you’ve missed the accent of my battery post.  We do not argue abstract topologies but we argue the validity of topology in respect to sonic results.  I hope we all agree that we do not exactly know WHY affects electricity sound. We do know that deformation of sinusoid or not good, high distortions are not good but we do not necessarily know what is good for sound. PS Audio give a truly perfect sinusoid but and no distortion but has no sound. Dima’s Avicenna corrector gives absolutely perfect sinusoid and no distortions but has absolutely no effect to sound. So, what we do is invent to ourselves a panacea we call “battery”. However, if you talk to people who use buttery in fix bias then the claim the ALL batteries sound very different. So, the point that I made is that I do not need any anecdote of accidental successes of using battery, even if it is my own experience. What I do need is a methodologically legitimate method of assessments of sonic result caused by electricity.  From this perspective ANY SINGLE PERSON I heard who advocate battery was wrong in my view, let me to explain why.

Pretend you use battery and get better result. I do not doubt your finding BUT you got better result compare to bad electricity that you had before. So, you result is irrelevant be it proves that good electricity is better than bad electricity – very useful! What I would like instead is you to get good electricity and good sound and THEN introduce batteries. I have VERY high doubts that the result will be as dramatic as the battery-advocate love to claim.

The Cat
 


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-20-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 298
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 484
Post ID: 13195
Reply to: 13194
What's been neglected in this discussion so far is...
fiogf49gjkf0d
... yes... just sayin'... there's more to power supply than the AC input.

"If the power supply output ain't pretty, neither is the sound generally."

Audio electronics operate off DC. The conversion process from AC to DC has its own sonic consequences. And converters not only have their own signatures, but react very differently to various mains distortions and anomalies. It's a convolved situation!

These situations remain uncovered in both textbooks and vestpocket engineering. But we DO have some measurables -- lol.

Batteries bypass both aspects. Hence their utility.

clark

PS I wrote a longer, probably better version of this note but just as I hit "Post" the wireless connection went down, and apparently this site is not engineered to save. [Sigh]
03-21-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
oxric
Posts 194
Joined on 02-11-2010

Post #: 485
Post ID: 13196
Reply to: 13194
The Devil's Advocate
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
Rakesh,

I think you’ve missed the accent of my battery post.  We do not argue abstract topologies but we argue the validity of topology in respect to sonic results.  I hope we all agree that we do not exactly know WHY affects electricity sound. We do know that deformation of sinusoid or not good, high distortions are not good but we do not necessarily know what is good for sound. PS Audio give a truly perfect sinusoid but and no distortion but has no sound. Dima’s Avicenna corrector gives absolutely perfect sinusoid and no distortions but has absolutely no effect to sound. So, what we do is invent to ourselves a panacea we call “battery”. However, if you talk to people who use buttery in fix bias then the claim the ALL batteries sound very different. So, the point that I made is that I do not need any anecdote of accidental successes of using battery, even if it is my own experience. What I do need is a methodologically legitimate method of assessments of sonic result caused by electricity.  From this perspective ANY SINGLE PERSON I heard who advocate battery was wrong in my view, let me to explain why.

Pretend you use battery and get better result. I do not doubt your finding BUT you got better result compare to bad electricity that you had before. So, you result is irrelevant be it proves that good electricity is better than bad electricity – very useful! What I would like instead is you to get good electricity and good sound and THEN introduce batteries. I have VERY high doubts that the result will be as dramatic as the battery-advocate love to claim.

The Cat
 


Romy:

It is not the first and certainly not the last time you think I have misunderstood your post, or the point of it, or that I misunderstood your stance on methodology when it comes to sonic matters . Actually I do not think it is any of these things. You Romy, on the other hand, misapprehend my specific personal, to some extent selfish, concerns and did not see where I stand on the subject of batteries.

The first point I wish to correct, and which I thought was clear as a result of explicitly saying so, is that I do not advocate batteries as an alternative to good electricity and never will. The hassle is simply not worth it. There are other reasons but they overlap with the ones you list to some extent so I will not go over these here as there are a number of issues I wish to address first.

Even in cases where batteries might be used as an improvement to problems with poor mains electricity, I think one ought to consider batteries as a last resort and see if easier solutions might not address the problems more cost effectively and with less impact on practical considerations. I hate when it happens sometimes but I may have forgotten to charge a set of batteries, my 2 and 3-year olds demand that I play some music and I must explain that the batteries need recharging, and because these are special gel  batteries that it will be many hours before I can do so (and I don't want to connect a stand-by amplifier which is there for precisely this eventuality because i am feeling lazy but they don't need to know that!).

So Romy there you have it. I hate batteries with a vengeance!

But I take issue with your often used accusation that other audiophiles are using faulty methodology and their conclusions are null and void. I do not think anyone has ever questioned this stance of yours and the more you make this accusation uncorrected, the more you will perpetuate the myth that there is only ONE valid methodology and everything else is invalid. First of all the issue of correct methodology is only ever assessed with respect to the objectives one is striving for, and  for many audiophiles, that necessarily entails achieving an improvement in terms of sonic results. Unless someone is blatantly violating some basic tenet, such as examining the results on an oscilloscope but not switching on and listening  to the equipment, I think most people with a modicum  of intelligence will use the methodology you advocate although they will see  no need to spell it out for all and sunder. Secondly, irrespective of what you claim, methodology, as you well know coming from an engineering or scientific background, can have different objectives at different stages of a project. If you are  building a bridge, you will probably select in the early stages materials on the basis of generic principles rather than investigating how they will perform in the specific application. With electricity that makes even more sense. we try to make sure the evils we know about are addressed first before worrying  about the varying and specific issues of different batteries and implementations.

The last point I make also addresses in part the point you raise about different batteries sounding different. Yes Romy, and a fixed bias set-up may be even more susceptible to these variations, true I agree. And in the set-up which I will use where I will be using a total of 26 batteries, I may not have the inclination to try different brands...Still we need to start somewhere and address the evils we  know.

With regard to anecdotal evidence and how this it is contrary to a 'legitimate method of assessment', well let me say that I never claimed to have carried out such an experiment or my post would have been very different, as maybe you would have guessed by now. I would set up my goals, explain my methodology, justify the different choices made, explain my results, conduct control tests, repeat the results, have an independent panel of evaluators and then make a claim. Then I would brook little disagreement not based on a rigorous evaluation of my findings. But I am not there and make no such claim.

You also claim that my results are irrelevant because I may have only replaced bad electricity with batteries. I take your point and will only add that I don't look at my random grappling in the dark so to speak as  'results' as they do not follow a rigorous methodology which would make some real findings of universal significance. They work in this instance and I am aiming for better results with my next experimentation but will be no closer to a valid finding of fact of much value to anyone but myself in my circumstances.

This then brings me finally to the point I  thought I had made clearly in my last post, but not clearly enough obviously. Your conclusion that you have 'VERY high doubts that the result will be as dramatic as the battery-advocate love to claim' is mere speculation, based on the anecdotal evidence that you yourself question vehemently. It is empty speculation and does not help understand the contribution batteries might or might not make, and what role if any they should be given in a given set-up. A few years ago, when you were thinking more clearly about the subject, without prejudice and pre-conceptions, you mentioned that batteries worked well in some instances, for example in a DAC and step-up/phonostage. Paul also offered some anecdotal evidence to this effect. You warned that you thought you would not be investigating that path, and eventually you started posting with pictures of 10 tonnes  power generators on wheels. This is not of use to 99.99999% of people interested in this hobby Romy (although one day I might look into it as part of my interest in having a 'green' house and generating my own electricity from photovoltaic cells, wind turbines, or tapping into a geothermal source). On the other hand, maybe just maybe, chances are batteries might provide a tangible and cost-effective benefit to 1% of all audiophiles out there. You clearly are most unlikely to enjoy these benefits should they materialise but then I imagine you will have your own nuclear reactor onboard the decommissioned Russian aircraft carrier you will have converted to serve your own audio needs.

Lastly, to the relief of many I fear, is a point I wish to make about comparing batteries with good electricity. I understand where you are coming from and believe it is worth thinking of what we might learn from it. The results are reminiscent of game theory and rather humorous. Let's say the results are worse than using good electricity (it's not important how much worse for the present purpose) the conclusion: still use batteries since I presumably tried batteries because they must be better that the bad electricity that my system is suffering from in the first place. Or say the results are better than good electricity, well the conclusion is still clearly to use batteries.

Those who are still with me will understand that my concern is that we should not out of hand dismiss a solution which has not been tried, tested and found wanting by anyone who has contributed to this sure never-to-end thread.

Regards
Rakesh
03-21-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 526
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 486
Post ID: 13199
Reply to: 13192
When are batteries good?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 oxric wrote:
I fail to see the utility, as I have always done, of opinions, approaches or theories which make some dogmatic assumption based on limited experience with the said device. So for your opinion, which seems to deny that the Living Voice or the Red Wine Audio propositions have anything to offer, I take it that you must have tried these solutions and compared them maybe with solution(s) that in your view best addresses our dissatisfaction with the quality of mains electricity. I trust that this must be so, in the light of the opinions you express, and must therefore bend to your findings until I have the chance to do such a comparison myself, doubtful  as it is that I should ever get  the opportunity.
Ouch. Well, if you know me, I am anything if not obsessive and compulsive. I love to experiment with my audio system, to see what will happen. I have used batteries in the past, yes, in case you wondered. I especially was excited about the possibility of using batteries for active preamplification and turntable motors. Ultimately, it proved not to be the best solution for my system.


Remember I am not systematically anti-battery. I am anti-"pro-battery" which is to say I do not view it or anything else as a panacea. Each electrical device accomplishes a goal and degrades sound. The goal is to work within your system to find the optimization of device configurations that achieves the goal of conveying Sound with the least degradation. I do not argue at all that in some systems, the battery will work well. It may not be the best possible solution for that system nor the most practical, but it may be an improvement. Similarly, if my speaker wires were broken and I got some Monster Cable from Radio Shack, it may not be the ideal solution, but it is an improvement over no music. 


The core of what I am saying is that no device is a panacea. Each device is simply a tool for a specific purpose, that must be viewed within a context. The battery may work well in some systems for some purposes, but we should not be lulled into the belief that it is a universally good thing, nor should we come to believe that we need look no further.


Adrian
03-21-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,644
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 487
Post ID: 13200
Reply to: 13199
Batteries Are Not About Batteries
fiogf49gjkf0d
A battery is nothing more than one approach to power up a component.  If it works, great.  If not, move on.  Of course it's a compromise.  So, how does it stack up to other available power sources?  Anti-battery people, remember that "available" power sources means different things to different people.  Pro-battery people, I wonder if battery power is co-equal to good line power.  I sincerely doubt it.  If nothing else, different power sources would likely indicate different component designs (for wall or battery power).

Paul S
03-21-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
oxric
Posts 194
Joined on 02-11-2010

Post #: 488
Post ID: 13201
Reply to: 13199
Batteries, possibly a means to an end? I never said anything but.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 drdna wrote:
Remember I am not systematically anti-battery. I am anti-"pro-battery" which is to say I do not view it or anything else as a panacea. Each electrical device accomplishes a goal and degrades sound. The goal is to work within your system to find the optimization of device configurations that achieves the goal of conveying Sound with the least degradation. I do not argue at all that in some systems, the battery will work well. It may not be the best possible solution for that system nor the most practical, but it may be an improvement. Similarly, if my speaker wires were broken and I got some Monster Cable from Radio Shack, it may not be the ideal solution, but it is an improvement over no music. 


The core of what I am saying is that no device is a panacea. Each device is simply a tool for a specific purpose, that must be viewed within a context. The battery may work well in some systems for some purposes, but we should not be lulled into the belief that it is a universally good thing, nor should we come to believe that we need look no further.


Adrian


Adrian:

I could not agree more with the above views and not being pro or anti-battery myself, there is no danger I would view batteries as either a universal panacea or anything other than a device that may be part of the plethora of tools at our disposal when we seek to address some perceived weakness in our playback. I hope I did not sound too abrasive but trust you will forgive me if I say that I did so in order to emphasize a point, as the subject of batteries deserves to be given more serious consideration, in my mind.

On a separate note, I have also read a little more into the PP2000 that you are apparently now using. It sounds very promising. It can be battery powered by internal batteries for about ten minutes, and for longer by making your own battery power packs. Now here is the interesting thing...After reading Romy's experiences with it, I called up the company and one of the technicians suggested that as part of the listening tests that were carried out, it was thought the unit sounded as good powered off the mains as when it was powered off batteries. I will be the first to acknowledge the logical flaws in this argument, and the other unknown quantities in their evaluation processes, but it does suggest that batteries do no harm, a surprising result given the high current demands that could be made on the unit. You are of course well-placed to pursue that line of inquiry if you are so inclined, although I doubt you will be, being 'anti pro-battery'.

Regards
Rakesh
03-21-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,644
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 489
Post ID: 13202
Reply to: 13201
Actually...
fiogf49gjkf0d
I seem to remember reports from the field saying the things work better unplugged from the mains (ie, off their batteries...).

How funny is that?

Best regards,
Paul S
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,131
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 490
Post ID: 13204
Reply to: 13196
A cry of a self-neutered Cat.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 oxric wrote:
But I take issue with your often used accusation that other audiophiles are using faulty methodology and their conclusions are null and void. I do not think anyone has ever questioned this stance of yours and the more you make this accusation uncorrected, the more you will perpetuate the myth that there is only ONE valid methodology and everything else is invalid. First of all the issue of correct methodology is only ever assessed with respect to the objectives one is striving for, and  for many audiophiles, that necessarily entails achieving an improvement in terms of sonic results. Unless someone is blatantly violating some basic tenet, such as examining the results on an oscilloscope but not switching on and listening to the equipment, I think most people with a modicum  of intelligence will use the methodology you advocate although they will see  no need to spell it out for all and sunder. Secondly, irrespective of what you claim, methodology, as you well know coming from an engineering or scientific background, can have different objectives at different stages of a project. If you are  building a bridge, you will probably select in the early stages materials on the basis of generic principles rather than investigating how they will perform in the specific application. With electricity that makes even more sense. we try to make sure the evils we know about are addressed first before worrying  about the varying and specific issues of different batteries and implementations.
Rakesh,

I wish I had time now and strength to argue this above subject, which I find very interning and stimulating for me. Unfortunately nowadays my mind saturated not with audio ideas but with polyurethane fume and with frustration the all 1.5” pipe connectors are all sold out after the last week New England flooding. To be very abridged I would say that I do feel that in most of the cases audio people do not use any methodologically sensible methods.  I am very much one of them and although I do advocate “methodologically clean” way to conduct audio assessments I very frequently do NOT use them. Here is we approach to most interesting subject on your post. I never felt that there is “ONE valid methodology and everything else is invalid” but since you pitch me this idea I VERY much like it.

Warn you that we DO NOT talk about the methodology of audio evaluations. I begin to cover this subject in here:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=50

… and I have  or need no second opinion on the subject. However, the methodological “CLEANNESS” of the following and the alleged existence of the ONLY ONE valid bind with methodology is something that I find very interesting to think about. I think I will return to this subject when my mind will be free from hardwood floor sanding and from trees planting… I think this stupid mode of self-inflicted domesticated neutering will be over in 2-3 weeks.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 117
Joined on 03-15-2010

Post #: 491
Post ID: 13205
Reply to: 13204
Pp2000
fiogf49gjkf0d
Have a hum through my center channel speaker, the SET amp of which sits directly in front of the pp200 about a foot away.  It is not relaTED to the DC offset of the 2000 as adjusting that does nothing to the hum, and running the amp from the wall rather than the 200 also doesn't decrease the hum. Thus the 2000 must be giving off a significant field. Moving the 2000 a couple of feet significantly decreases the hum as does running the 2000 on batteries.
Also have noted a slight increase in ambiance information while running on the batteries but am unsure whether this is due to more information coming through or less hum from the center channel.

The unit does such a great job, far superior to anything else I've used over the years that I've ordered two for a review. Hoprfull that will allow me to run my Crown Macro Reference off one of the units, and the eight SET amps off the other, as with peaks now the pp2000 goes into protective mode with the Crown attached to it as it draws 1500 watts on peaks.
Thank you Romy for the find.

Bill
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,131
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 492
Post ID: 13207
Reply to: 13205
Measuring the manufacturing confidence.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 Bill wrote:
Have a hum through my center channel speaker, the SET amp of which sits directly in front of the pp200 about a foot away.  It is not relaTED to the DC offset of the 2000 as adjusting that does nothing to the hum, and running the amp from the wall rather than the 200 also doesn't decrease the hum. Thus the 2000 must be giving off a significant field. Moving the 2000 a couple of feet significantly decreases the hum as does running the 2000 on batteries.
Also have noted a slight increase in ambiance information while running on the batteries but am unsure whether this is due to more information coming through or less hum from the center channel.

The unit does such a great job, far superior to anything else I've used over the years that I've ordered two for a review. Hoprfull that will allow me to run my Crown Macro Reference off one of the units, and the eight SET amps off the other, as with peaks now the pp2000 goes into protective mode with the Crown attached to it as it draws 1500 watts on peaks.

Well, in this unique case we can truly compare notes and we used the SAME unit. What the chance that another two people in the face of the Earth will have two identically performing PP2000.  But how many people out there truly coals to what PP2000 outputs? Do you see anybody beside me measure the PP2000 output – you NEVER see it. Furthermore, I insist that the PurePowe manufacturer do not measure/test their units at all, since all production runs have own set of “behavior” and they learn about it … from customers.

I did not have any hum of any kind, so I can’t comment on this. Most likely, since you have a LOT of equipment in your room, you have a differenced in grounding between your many amps.

The field that PP2000 radiate is significant. It is an impulse amp – an audio equals of a radioactive device – so I would keep it further away from system.  In my ne room I am planning to put PP2000in basement.

About the sonic differences between batteries vs. wall. In some of my PP2000 it did not exist and the unit was measured identically when it runs on batteries or connected to wall. In my unit indeed there is a VERY SMALL difference, I feel a negligible difference. My init also clearly measured identically as they fuck up battery charging circuit and as a result the unit has the “famous fuzziness”. I reported about it a year and a half ago; they promised to fix but what I talk to them I do not feel that we are in the same page as any single conversation with them do not sound like a continuation of the previous one. I only presume that if they fix the “fuzziness” then the difference between the batteries vs. wall will not exist. Now, will they screw up something while they fix the “fuzziness”? No one knows….

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 117
Joined on 03-15-2010

Post #: 493
Post ID: 13208
Reply to: 13207
Pp2000
fiogf49gjkf0d
It's not a grounding problem, but purely 60 HZ RF coming off the 2000. And it's only one amp that seems to be affected as a second SET on top of that one doesn't produce the hum. Of course that could be because it's a tweeter amp working above 9000HZ. The further the unit is moved away from the amp, the less hum is produced. Maybe building a Farraday cage around will cure the problem with the caGE ON A SEParate ground.

Bill
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
PurePower
Ayr, ON
Posts 44
Joined on 05-26-2009

Post #: 494
Post ID: 13209
Reply to: 13208
Ground noise
fiogf49gjkf0d
To hear hum in the speakers usually requires a combination of conditions - including sensitive speakers and a ground system capapble of carrying the noise signal.

I would place my bet on common mode noise being carried on the safety ground long before blaming RF.  Every time we have investigated this kind of issue it has been very clear on the scope - the noise is visible on the oscilloscope when you probe the neutral to ground pair, but the AC will have a clean, noise free sine wave.

Ideally, a perfect ground system will have no potential between neutral and ground - and thus no capacity to carry a noise signal. That's why two systems can be identical - yet one has hum and the other does not. No two ground situations are identical.

 I have to admit that creating a perfect ground is not always an easy task - but we have been very successful in removing ground noise by finding and correcting ground problems. It is definately the first place to look.
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,131
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 495
Post ID: 13210
Reply to: 13209
The PP2000 in duet.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Which bring another interesting subject – will the PP2000 be able to handle properly grounds if there are two PP2000 handle in the same system. Bill what to run him SS monster from isolated PP2000. What I install my playback and will have essentials 3500 sq feet listening space at LF then I will most likely be using the very similar 1kW monster bass amp and might be looking at second PP2000.

Now, if each PP2000 have own pattern to run off the own specifications then does it make since to get rid of my unit and to get two unit of the same vintage. Sure, it will not assurance that they will be alike but it will be at least hope.  If I get two units and one of them has 2V between neutral and ground and another have 92V (not of 7 units had the same voltage in there) then…. can we continue taking about the methodological kosher ways….

PP2000’s loads can work with lifted ground (I prefer do not do it) but the PP2000 shall be plugged into the way with grounds, means crate a perfect opportunity for ground loops….

The caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 117
Joined on 03-15-2010

Post #: 496
Post ID: 13211
Reply to: 13209
Pp2000
fiogf49gjkf0d
I would place my bet on common mode noise being carried on the safety ground long before blaming RF
The ground on the amp has been tried both lifted and present. I have reversed the AC cord using a cheater plug without effect. I have tried grounding the chassis of the amp directly to it preamp, its active crossover and  the pp2000 to no effect. I have even disconnected the amp from its sources and connected it only to the speakers, and have used several different AC cords for the amp. \On the other hand the only 20 amp cord I had is a long 10 foot run of standard 12 gauge electrical cable so that may be the problem. Will try to get a decent cord for the pp2000 to see if that helps. 

The only thing that helps is moving the pp 2000 chassis away from the amp or turning off the external power switch on the back and running on batteries. Thus the feeling that its RF but I could be wrong. Will have to see what happens when I get my two units. Interestingly its only this one amp but it is the closest to the pp2000 chassis.

Bill
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
clarkjohnsen
Boston, MA, US
Posts 298
Joined on 06-02-2004

Post #: 497
Post ID: 13212
Reply to: 13196
More good sense from Rakesh
fiogf49gjkf0d
"We should not out of hand dismiss a solution which has not been tried, tested and found wanting by anyone who has contributed to this sure never-to-end thread."

How can that be argued with?

clark
03-22-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,644
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 498
Post ID: 13213
Reply to: 13211
Tinfoil Hats
fiogf49gjkf0d
Bill, have you been using and reporting on Romy's unit, while you wait for your own unit to arrive?  I ask because if this is the case then we still have no evidence that there is a second viable unit out there.

It sounds like the AC/DC converter/charger is a common cause of noise with these guys.  Also, the pulsed power is in every way noisy.  It will absolutely pollute anything on the same line, or even on the same sub-panel, if the ground is not split off the neutral all the way to the main ground bus; and even then it might mess it up.

You might check with the tinfoil hat people and get enough Mu metal to make a "chimney"/barricade around the PP2000.  This should quell the EMI, if that's it.

Best regards,
Paul S
03-23-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 117
Joined on 03-15-2010

Post #: 499
Post ID: 13214
Reply to: 13213
Pp2000
fiogf49gjkf0d
This is Romy's unit that he let me borrow.
It does produce the cleanest electricvity I've heard in my system in over 30 years of trying.
A new find last night: The one amp with the problem power supply transformer is buzzing at the same frequency as the speaker noise and after about an hour is very hot. The other SET amps's transformers are not even warm.
This amp is from Jack eliano at electraprint Audio and the other's are a mixture of his and Vacuum State units. Whether it's the transformer itself that's the problem or the convertor I don't know, but I'd rather trade out the am than lose the sound I'm getting from the unit.
Bill
03-23-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,131
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 500
Post ID: 13215
Reply to: 13214
This is what I would like to avoid.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 Bill wrote:
….It does produce the cleanest electricvity I've heard in my system in over 30 years of trying… but I'd rather trade out the am than lose the sound I'm getting from the unit.

This perception of the relationship between cleaner electricity and better sound is something that I feel is not clear and I would like to avoid by making the “easy” assumption. The PP2000 does not produce “cleanest electricity”, let do not mislead ourselves. Whatever electricity it produces does have very good Sound, it is undeniable and in a way unique among ALL other electricity dealing equipment I have seen so far. So, we do not taking about the sound of electricity itself but the sound of the mechanisms that create/recreate electricity. It is not so simple, Bill, and I do not know who knows what the relationship between electricity and sound. I doubt that PurePower people know themselves – they just by pure accident hit something that happened to be good - let hope they will not lose it. Be advised that I had the PurePower unit (I think it was number 5 or 6, you need to look back in the thread) that did not sound right at all and the PurePower folks did not know the difference.

I do not think I will need my unit soon. I did measure the electricity in my new house – it was a nightmare. I was bitching about the clipping in my Back Bay home but in at new place it 10 times worse (measurable, not auditable). So, I will need it but later. I wonder if you will be able to get your unit within a month. Then you will be able to compare the sound of my unit with the sound of your unit. They might be VERY different. I would like also to measure you new unit to see what the PP new production is. I local guy that I know did buy 2 month back a new PP2000 and it was measured horrible  - a pure faulty production and no quality control at all. The PurePower admitted that it was faulty production run and promised to fix it. Now, how many people out there are going in the extend I do and demand proper operation, how many people out there are running faulty PP2000 and do not know about it? My estimate is that the majority of PP2000 out there are just broken and are not to the own specification. They do sound good however. Still my agenda is not promote or demote PP2000 or any other power de but a consumer advocacy and my desire to have for myself a better performing product.  I am with PurePower for 2 years, had 7 of their units and my current is still has a faulty operation.

I do understand that PurePower is a work in progress and they do take care about their customers but that way how they do all of it is a bit ridicules for me and insult me with amateurism. They have a great product in my view, they sell it very fast and I hope they do fine financially. I do not know how much time and money they west for support but I know a LOT of people who keep fixing their PurePower units. So, why PurePower would not heir a truly knowledgeable engineer who would chaise all bags that PurePower has and convert it in a stable product, virtually “support free”? I good engineer-contractor would cost them let say $30K-$50K, who care – that is a single rain drop in a whole ocean…

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 25 of 96 (1,911 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 23 24 25 26 27 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  What lives in Symmetric Sound?..  The beginning of our journey is ALWAYS symmetrical...  Audio Discussions  Forum     19  174397  05-28-2004
  »  New  Always check power-line polarity...  The Cost of Knowing...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     11  111780  07-10-2005
  »  New  RAAL “Water Drop” tweeter for Macondo...  Your comment takes me by surprise...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     77  922132  02-16-2007
  »  New  My feelings about new exciting audio products..  Vacuumstate...  Audio Discussions  Forum     25  263959  04-30-2007
  »  New  Musique Concrete horns..  These are now sold as Kornhent products...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     6  107915  06-12-2007
  »  New  Compression drivers and the “clean signal”...  The NEW “Compression drivers and the clean signal”....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     14  162910  07-12-2007
  »  New  Digi Redux; Drive 1 transport and iDAT-44+ DAC..  Confirmation and Relief...  Didital Things  Forum     26  229190  09-28-2007
  »  New  Metal domes..  Try the one Lansche is using...  Audio Discussions  Forum     6  78656  11-08-2007
  »  New  The power AC Outlets?..  Where to Pick Up the Gong?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     2  43051  10-31-2008
  »  New  The Avicenna's failure is the great Avicenna success!..  New life for Avicenna...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  83632  02-03-2009
  »  New  Internet and electricity..  Suboptimal. . ....  Didital Things  Forum     1  29236  01-07-2010
  »  New  Electricity... power strips and ac improvements..  Electricity... power strips and ac improvements...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  16628  03-30-2010
  »  New  Another example of energy..  System Warm up...  Audio Discussions  Forum     1910  9896154  01-29-2011
  »  New  I good spot-light for a turntable?..  Reply...  Analog Playback Forum     15  154215  10-24-2010
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts