Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › NEWS: PortaCode : The Utimate Battery Powered Headphone Amp
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NEWS: PortaCode : The Utimate Battery Powered Headphone Amp - Page 4

post #46 of 86
ehhh ... like i said ... it's too complex to be made into a point to point, it would be ridiculously big. This pcb is jam packed with parts, we're looking for semi transportable as it is already.
post #47 of 86
Of course point to point would be out of the question but that was not My point. From having heard some of the newer and well designed amps that use pcb, there seems to be some nice improvement in dialectric problems, which is good as pcb is about the only way currently to get to the stage where something can be small and high quality, if thought and a little art is involved.
post #48 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG POPPA View Post
Now I didn't know size mattered in transportable audio nirvana. OMG
There's a point when one just doesn't want to strap a 10U rackmount onto their back.
post #49 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killercrush View Post
The only thing I dislike about his designs is the damn bass boost control, get rid of it and I'm all over it.
This is the best bass control ever implemented, if you say that, you have no read a single line about how it works, please read before judging, and the most imporntat thing, listen to it before judging as well, my PPA literally kill tons of more expensive amps out there basboost on, or off...

But anyway you can "get rid of it", as it is optional...
post #50 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarium View Post
My question is... Phil said that the 3 channel topology gives all/most of the benefits of balanced sound without the negatives. What are the negatives?
From other of the long Uncle Phil's posts in ipodstudio forum long time ago:


(Q) From various sources, the advantages of having a balanced amp with a differential output seem to be:
1.double slew rate due to nature the inverting and non-inverting signal being of opposite phase

(A) The Reason the slew rate is twice that of a non-balanced output is because slew rate defines how many volts in one time period the amplifier can slew or retrace from the positive peak of the waveform to the negative peak. In order for the slewing rate to be improved the Amplifier must be able to slew more voltage in the same amount of time. This is done ether by making the waveform shorter in Duration (Higher in frequency) or larger in amplitude (More output Voltage) the slew rating of an amplifier is mealy the measure of how high in frequency a given Amplifier can maintain a specified output voltage, If the available output voltage remains unchanged then slew rate improvements must come from making the amplifier faster. If the amplifier cannot be made faster the slew improvements can come from making the available output voltage the amplifier can produce greater. By ether doubling the high frequency performance of the amplifier or doubling the available output voltage the slew rate will be twice that it was before. It is interesting to note that since improving the available output voltage and high frequency performance both result in higher slew rate specs that by improving the available output voltages by twice in addition to improving the high frequency performance by twice with give 4 times the slew rate as ether voltage output or speed improvements alone achieve. The answer to this question is that by virtue of balanced output providing twice the output voltage for a given Amplifier configuration than a similarly configured non-balanced amplifier the slew rate of the balanced amplifier is now twice due to twice the available output voltage.

(Q) 2.(in theory) four times the power due to half impedance seen by each amp (per channel) leading to twice the current and twice the voltage due to the signals being of opposite phase

(A) this is actually one of the disadvantages of balanced operation is that since the amp is seeing half the load impedance that a non balanced amp would for the same transducer the lower impedance limit the amplifier can safely drive is now also twice what is is in the unbalanced configuration and thus the load driving ability of the Amp is now reduced by half. It is a misconception to believe balanced amplifiers have twice the output current capability because reality is that the current demands placed on the amp are greater. This causes current limiting and compression in the amp because its power supply and output current capabilities remain unchanged where as the demands placed upon it have just got worse by twice. This is why a typical loudspeaker amp will have a low impedance load tolerance of twice what it would operated unbalanced, thus Amplifiers able to be used with Loudspeakers of 4 ohms minimum are now restricted to loudspeakers with twice that impedance or 8 ohms.

(Q) 3.push-pull output supposedly has more authority on the headphone driver membranes

(A) this is because of more available output voltage results in more power and thus more power adds authority and dynamics however for the headphone amplifier obtaining any required amount of power without resorting to balanced output is obtainable with higher voltage power supply Operating voltages. The Headcode operates on supply voltages that are twice that of the highest voltages used in op-Amp based Designs where as the op-amp is limited to supply voltages of 24-36 volts rail to rail or +/- 12 to +/- 18 Volts the Headcode operates on +/- 36 volts (72 volts rail to rail) and as such will provide twice the output voltages of an Op-Amp based Design operating on its highest safe voltages of +/- 18 Volts and are typically operated on +/- 12 to 15 volts.

(Q) 4.no common ground for better common-mode-rejection and less channel crosstalk (although I have read that the PPA counteracts this with an active ground)

(A) This is one advantage of balanced operation that has some merit and to address this I introduced the ground channel in the PPA. Under development is the next generation of this same technology first introduced to the High End Headphone Community in the PPA, LaRocco Audio’s TRIAD topology continues with improvements to the TRI-Mode of operation of which was first introduced in the PPA. With the addition of one complete additional power supply including power transformer and one complete amplifier channel known previously as the ground channel in such amps as the PPA, the Headcode Dual mono can become the Headcode TRIAD. Once the TRIAD topology is refined to the High standards set by the Headcode Larry at LaRocco Audio will offer TRIAD upgrades. The Headcode Dual mono however is unchained from most of the Limitations imposed upon the PPA such as a single power supply for the entire Amplifier to accommodate portability as the PPA is a portable amp. It was primarily the desire to have an Amplifier that will tolerate poor quality wall adapters that resulted in the Technology used in the PPA. The Headcode by virtue of two completely separate power supplies including the power transformer result in elimination of any inter-channel reactions.

(Q) 5.6dB more dynamical range (picked that up from Rane.com, I’ll have to check on the exact reason but I suppose it has to do with the increased voltage)

(A) This is true since more voltage is available the dynamic range is also improved. However obtaining more voltage dose not requires a balanced output but is obtained in a more linear fashion with more power supply voltage.

(Q) [Just a quick check whether I got the terminologies right: Differential simply means that there a two signals being opposite of phase (+2V and –2V for instance). But then again, the “differential amp” is defined as a amp that takes a negative and positive input signal and one output that responds to the difference between these signal. So does that mean that “differential” only refers to the input? Bridge-tie load means that the speakers/headphones are driven from two outputs via push-pull and with a inverting and non-inverting signal (e.g. +2V and –2V). And balanced is just a general term applying to both driving issues as well as balanced lines.]

(A) Yes just as the term is used to describe the differential of your automobile. If your vehicle is raised upon a lift while in a service station you cold rotate one rear tire and watch the other one turn the opposite direction on rear wheel drive vehicle.

(Q) Now, I understand that these kinds of short lists only cover the theory but not the actual implementation. Still, balanced mode seems to be everybody’s darling at the moment especially because most audiophiles understand enough electronics to grasp the basic concepts like “quadruple power”, “twice slew rate” and “no common ground”, and to be honest, they do sound quite convincing in theory, especially the slew rate part. I wonder whether truly balanced operation of headphone amps also has its disadvantages seeing that many state of the art amps like the RP010 or Angstrom amps are not balanced either. And finally, why did you decide to use a non-balanced single-ended output for the Headcode?

(A) If you consider that each channel of the Headcode is comprised of true fully symmetrical complementary Circuits from the input to the output and are only tied together at the input and output and otherwise contain completely separate however symmetrical circuitry. In Actual operation by virtue of a fully complementary PNP NPN relationship formed between semiconductor devices of each half of the internally balanced circuit the Headcode has symmetrical rising and falling slewing rates and similar transfer function of both the positive and negative half of the circuit. In conventional balanced output configurations the operation of two independent amplifiers in both the inverting mode and the other in the non-inverting mode results in each half of the waveform being processed by Amplifiers with completely different slew rates and frequency response. Even ideal matched dual IC op amps containing two perfectly matched Amplifiers on one chip are subject to this if one Amplifier of the dual is operated in the inverting mode and the other in the non-inverting mode the one operated in the Inverting mode will typically have higher slew rates and bandwidth in addition the spectral content of the distortion spectrum will also be different than the one operating in the non inverting mode. This is thus processing each half of the waveform differently in the ultra critical time domain.
post #51 of 86
I just don't understand why someone would want a bass boost on an amp, it should be only amplifying the signal the best it can to give the best frequency response, the lowest distortion, awesome transparency, excellent dynamic range, clean sound etc, wire with-gain style IMO... no need to use all sorts of bells and whistles. I guess I'm mostly a purist when it comes to amps, I want the amp to be pure as water as possible.

Hell, if you want more bass, just use another can if it doesn't satisfy.

Cool thing that it's optional ! : )
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killercrush View Post
I just don't understand why someone would want a bass boost on an amp, it should be only amplifying the signal the best it can to give the best frequency response, the lowest distortion, awesome transparency, excellent dynamic range, clean sound etc, wire with-gain style IMO... no need to use all sorts of bells and whistles. I guess I'm mostly a purist when it comes to amps, I want the amp to be pure as water as possible.

Hell, if you want more bass, just use another can if it doesn't satisfy.

Cool thing that it's optional ! : )
Why not trying to find some info, and reading a little bit on why this bass-boost was implemented, it was on the LaRocco page, and it was discussed here as well...LOL...

Well in a few quick words:

Again you can use it or not, it is optional...the problem is not the amp, is the headphones and the recordings made during some period of time what created "the need" for it.
The headphones mainly all of them, do not go that low as to give you the feeling of that bass impact as speakers does...bass boost gives you that...Pure, not pure? Who cares, IMO to hear a mutilated spectrum due to any anomaly, from the drivers, or from the system, or from the recording, is not purism, it is called masochism in my book...IMO of course...
That was why Fletcher-Munson did some studies, on the human perception and came out with some theories about the loudness of the human hearing at different levels, in some cases to boost some freqs is a need...

Till now just one headphone have done a proper job on the bass to me, and that is why I'm not using now my PPA anymore, the Edition 9...no other gives you a more realistic low bass impact IMO...

Also during the 70/80's they tried to extend the paying time of the LP's, trying to put more material on the LPs, so they need to increase the amount of grooves, but that is trade of, in order to get that amount, the only way was by reducing the size of the groves. While you reduce the size of the grooves, some of the low freq is affected, all in order to achieve that "space requirement"....that was what made many old recordings to sound thin...later on while the CD kicked in, the CD producers, trying to absurdly imitate the sound of the LP's (rather than the analog sound of the master tape) mimicked the same problem, problem that now days we do not have, as they understood what to do...well actually not very well yet...so the 70/80 music lovers as I am, and as Phil is, and Larry is, faced that same problem, the only way to fix that, bass-boost!!!!
post #53 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverlordXenu View Post
There's a point when one just doesn't want to strap a 10U rackmount onto their back.
When I heard the Lisa III for the first time. The size did not matter. I think I said something like " I don't care if I have to carry around a car battery". The sound out of an Ipod blew me away. Now the Portacode...... Just back that baby in my front yard it's OK. I know whats coming
post #54 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
From other of the long Uncle Phil's posts in ipodstudio forum long time ago:
HI Sovkiller,

Thanks a lot for the refresher.

One thing that I admire :Phil Larocco, on top of his great design, is his willingness to frankly discuss and share openly in the community. I haven't seen any one who goes this far.

But I think it is worth pointing out that Phil is NOT against balance configuration. I think he understand the pros and cons of balance, and figure out a way to realise most of the pros in his single end design, while avoiding the downside. Pretty smart and convincing IMO.

On the other hand, I heard that Phil is, apparently, planning his "Grand Finale" - a ultimate best of the best class of home amp that will also include balanced configuration. This may be rumor though.

F. Lo
post #55 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post
Triadaudio.net.

I will say that while I love my Lisa III, I also am not in the market for a $2k (trans) portable, now or ever, no matter how amazing. Heck, $1200 is the most I have ever spent on a headphone amp of any kind.

But if the logic is that this is just a world-class headphone amp that happens to be battery powered, then it should be judged against home amps only, especially if it is not compromised in any way by being battery operated.
this sounds like it's in the same market as vinnie's Signature 30, which is battery-driven. put some binding posts on this portacode and let's see how it drives the k1000
post #56 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kugino View Post
this sounds like it's in the same market as vinnie's Signature 30, which is battery-driven. put some binding posts on this portacode and let's see how it drives the k1000
Honestly, I would think the PortaCode is a different beast from the Sig 30, and targeting at different audio needs.

The PortaCode has a very focused objectives targeting at dynamic headphones. And I believe it is going to achieve these objectives with flying colours.

Trying to have a "all-in-one" magic box - driving both normal dynamic headphones AND K1000 may introduce too much compromise in design, to the detriment of listening experience, and our wallet as well.

Of course, there are exceptions. The WA5 can drive both high and low impedance headphones AND the K1000. But if one looks closer you will find there are actually separate circuits, but just happen to share some common infrastructure in the amp.

I personally would be more than happy to use the PortaCode solely for my collection of dynamic headphones.

I will be saving up now - a dollar a day and in 4 years time I should be able to buy one used

F. Lo
post #57 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by kugino View Post
this sounds like it's in the same market as vinnie's Signature 30, which is battery-driven. put some binding posts on this portacode and let's see how it drives the k1000
this is completely different from vinnie's Signature 30 or 70 for that matter, it is SS discrete design and not a digital chip, digital designs need a coil and often a capacitor on the signal path while this design has none of these, therefore the only mutual idea they have in common is the battery power, and even the battery is a little different because with Phil's design i understood that it works both with battery and can work with its dedicated PSU unlike vinnie's.
post #58 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by fkclo View Post
HI Sovkiller,

Thanks a lot for the refresher.

One thing that I admire :Phil Larocco, on top of his great design, is his willingness to frankly discuss and share openly in the community. I haven't seen any one who goes this far.

F. Lo
phil just wrote complete explanations above on this thread, Phil is PPL, i actually noticed that when there are issues that no one seems to answer he always clears things up.
post #59 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by fkclo View Post
HI Sovkiller,

Thanks a lot for the refresher.

One thing that I admire :Phil Larocco, on top of his great design, is his willingness to frankly discuss and share openly in the community. I haven't seen any one who goes this far.

F. Lo
Phil just wrote complete explanations above on this thread, Phil is PPL, i actually noticed that when there are issues that no one seems to answer he always clears things up, though i do admit he is some what of a "shadow designer".
post #60 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberan View Post
Phil just wrote complete explanations above on this thread, Phil is PPL, i actually noticed that when there are issues that no one seems to answer he always clears things up, though i do admit he is some what of a "shadow designer".
Can you explain what a "shadow designer" means ? I am asking because I believe Phil is a real and solid designer in headphone amps.

F. Lo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › NEWS: PortaCode : The Utimate Battery Powered Headphone Amp