Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Rudistor with Omega II.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rudistor with Omega II. - Page 3

post #31 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post


About the topology and schematics, if I understood correctly, he received the schematics of the Stax amp, and not Rudi's...and comparing both by visual inspection, from a picture of the top of the amp, as there is no picture of the guts of the Egmont Signature in the website at all, he decided that both were equivalent with a simplified PSU...Good...a very informed opinion!!!

You understand very little correctly. I have pictures of the insides of
an egmont signature. I will not say where i got them. I could post them
here but they would not last long as they certainly were not pictures
of my amplifier.

It does not matter. There is absolutely nothing new or unique about
any rudistor product. Rudi used to be very anti opamp and all about
"correct spectral harmonic compensation" Whatever that was. Now
his solid state products are covered with opamps. Wonder what happened.
A box of boxes. And hand laid out circuit boards with no ground plane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
Also keep in mind that many of those schematic from huge companies, have patents that protect them, they are huge companies, to get a pattent takes a lot of time...nobody for a few amps will file even a pattent for them, and that is why they protect the schematics with more care.
Again you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. A copyright is one
thing a patent is something else. For a company to be issued a patent something
has to be unique or different. None of those companies have anything unique or
different. Nelson Pass has a few different patents on some very different kind
of circuit technologies, few of which would hold up in a court of law.
The microzotl is protected by a patent. Have not seen a single other tube circuit
patented in the last 40 years.
post #32 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
But I think that you misunderstood my posts, where did I recommned any product, Rudistor or any other in this thread. I just posted becasue I saw some not very clear information about a non very common and non very known product...

And is more I have a lot more info, that I will refrain from posting, that will make some of those posts made by others, even completelly absurd, but I will not go into more arguments, it is not my intention at all, now if you want to compare those two amps, and keep on arguing that is up to you, but with no schematics of any of the two amps on hand, it will be really hard to do ...




This is one of my weaknesses it takes very little to make me come back...
Actually I am in complete agreement with didwlgh on this.

Just to make a point, in this thread you are arguing the exact opposite point you are arguing here. In fact, here YOU challenge someone to post circuits on the two amps in question, that I believe he does not own. So in this case, is it germain to the discussion in your terms for him to worry about circuits even though he does not own the amp? So older can be as good? :
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...3&postcount=10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
Really??? The legendary Citation A Harman Kardon preamp is flat up to 1GHz, and is considered one of the top notch preamps ever made, a hell of a preamp, regardless that being made in the 60's...How many recent made preamps reach that figure with authority, or have that specs, being evne a lot more modern designs...(FYI, I have the curves and the whole manual, as a friend of mine owns it...)

BTW I would like that you post the schematics of the NX-33 and the Headroom balanced amp, just for comparison sake, to see which is more modern of the two, or at least in what elements did you base your opinion?...

And how do you know that a most modern circuit (in case of that being true) sounds better??? We have topologies from the 50's and older that still are used with good results, and will be used for long time...
And on the topic of recommending ultrasone, out of the blue on a topic about other headphones, you come and post strictly about the product you sell, seems peculiar to me:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...8&postcount=29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
You do not need to, get an Edition 9, it sounds surprisingly good, and till now it had never stopped amazing me every day with new things in my albums....
And regarding someone who is reviewing a pair of Ultrasone headphones, you go as far as implying between the lines that people should not completely rely on what has been written as impressions, because he is "human..."
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...1&postcount=27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
Guys markl is a fine reviewer, and I have trusted him many times with very good results, and I consider him a gifted guy with very good ears, but do not forget that he is human, and he has his preferences, do not discount that OK...He owns the R-10, two of them, BTW...if I would owned two pairs of R-10 I would never look any further...LOL...

And also keep in mind that he is not familiar with the S-Logic presentation yet, IMO the headphone is not fully burned in neither, and his description match perfectly what I heard while the headphone had 150-200 hours, but not fully burn in as it is now....and the other but, a big but, he is comparing it with the R-10 that IMO is the best dynamic headphone ever made, so what do you expect, if you want to make premature conclusions, that is up to you, but at least I can tell you, that after having heard both, and being familiar with the S-Logic, they are very close in performance, at least closer than any other ever IME...
So, I don't mind people making suggestions and making reviews and posting them online. In my humble opinion this serves two purposes for the community: It creates a public database of people's perceptions and gear evaluations. Second, it provides a venue for people to get to know each other's taste and use them as guides for their own journey. It also educate us in the fine art of learning to read the fine print, and do not trust all we read. This is a much tricky art to learn.

On that last note, what I grow tired of is the hard-line approach to some of your posts as to whether some may not prefer a product you like, then there must be something awry with that system or person's perceptions.

Ultimately, the reason I bother to make this post, is that as members of this community one should be willing to guide newcomers. But guide them in a way that they can understand that we hear differently. We have different preferences and it is OK to not like a specific piece of equipment and prefer other ones. It seems to me that this should be like teaching someone how to ride a bicycle. Gentle guide, but once they can keep their equilibrium, then let them be.
post #33 of 83
Originally Posted by Sovkiller
Really??? The legendary Citation A Harman Kardon preamp is flat up to 1GHz, and is considered one of the top notch preamps ever made, a hell of a preamp, regardless that being made in the 60's...How many recent made preamps reach that figure with authority, or have that specs, being evne a lot more modern designs...(FYI, I have the curves and the whole manual, as a friend of mine owns it...)

I never saw this or i would have jumped all over it. I reguarly do stuff
in the 600mhz to 800mhz region. This is flat out wrong, not even close.
To do something like this would require striplines and mesafets. The
correct number is likely 1MHZ. Which for that preamp is probably true.
Sovkiller in this case is off my 1 million.
post #34 of 83
Quote:
It does not matter. There is absolutely nothing new or unique about
any rudistor product. Rudi used to be very anti opamp and all about
"correct spectral harmonic compensation" Whatever that was. Now
his solid state products are covered with opamps. Wonder what happened.
A box of boxes. And hand laid out circuit boards with no ground plane.
How do you know? So you have one schematic, or some pics of one amp, and you rule out the rest of the designs, there a lot of other designs that are not even in pictures, so I don't know how you know what is inside...And you are wrong, his solid state entrance level amps, two of them actually, have OPAmps and discrete buffers a very common solution nowdays for entrance level amps, and for not so entrance...but the rest are fully discrete...

About the ground plane, the boxes the hand layout, and all that theory and sarcasms, all I can tell you, with no fear at all, is that I'm still waiting to hear one your designs that I like, and I have heard a few of your amps, inlcuding the top notch and the electrostatic ones, very good implementations, very well done, with good parts...so if that ground plain serves a purpose in your designs, for sure is not to make them sound good to me...


Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
I never saw this or i would have jumped all over it. I reguarly do stuff in the 600mhz to 800mhz region. This is flat out wrong, not even close.
To do something like this would require striplines and mesafets. The correct number is likely 1MHZ. Which for that preamp is probably true. Sovkiller in this case is off my 1 million.
That was as stupid typo, of course is 1,000,000 Hz, I have the Freq resp curve in the manual...my fault...sorry...
post #35 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
I have pictures of the insides of
an egmont signature. I will not say where i got them.
I can definitely back this up. Kevin and I have never met but we have a mutual friend who paid me a visit some time ago. He took pics of the insides of several of my amps, the Egmont Signature and HEV90 among them. No doubt they were passed along and put to good use, or so I now surmise.
post #36 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wmcmanus View Post
I can definitely back this up. Kevin and I have never met but we have a mutual friend who paid me a visit some time ago. He took pics of the insides of several of my amps, the Egmont Signature and HEV90 among them. No doubt they were passed along and put to good use, or so I now surmise.
Good use??? Well I'm no so sure now, to what extend to put them in such hands will be considered "a good use"...
post #37 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by CD44hi View Post
Actually I am in complete agreement with didwlgh on this.

Just to make a point, in this thread you are arguing the exact opposite point you are arguing here. In fact, here YOU challenge someone to post circuits on the two amps in question, that I believe he does not own. So in this case, is it germain to the discussion in your terms for him to worry about circuits even though he does not own the amp? So older can be as good? :
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...3&postcount=10
I never stated older is bad, not have ruled out any topology becasue of age, Ruid, we have very good old designs, there is no contradiction at all, where did I say the opposite here???

Quote:
And on the topic of recommending ultrasone, out of the blue on a topic about other headphones, you come and post strictly about the product you sell, seems peculiar to me:
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...8&postcount=29
Which product I sell? Rudistor does not sell any Ultrasone heapdhones, I'm recommneding the headphone I like and own, period...

Quote:
And regarding someone who is reviewing a pair of Ultrasone headphones, you go as far as implying between the lines that people should not completely rely on what has been written as impressions, because he is "human..."
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showpo...1&postcount=27

So, I don't mind people making suggestions and making reviews and posting them online. In my humble opinion this serves two purposes for the community: It creates a public database of people's perceptions and gear evaluations. Second, it provides a venue for people to get to know each other's taste and use them as guides for their own journey. It also educate us in the fine art of learning to read the fine print, and do not trust all we read. This is a much tricky art to learn.

On that last note, what I grow tired of is the hard-line approach to some of your posts as to whether some may not prefer a product you like, then there must be something awry with that system or person's perceptions.

Ultimately, the reason I bother to make this post, is that as members of this community one should be willing to guide newcomers. But guide them in a way that they can understand that we hear differently. We have different preferences and it is OK to not like a specific piece of equipment and prefer other ones. It seems to me that this should be like teaching someone how to ride a bicycle. Gentle guide, but once they can keep their equilibrium, then let them be.
I never said that, markl has a very good ears, and he is still ones of theo nes I follow in his recos, and the reason I got into the CD3K was his reco, after i follow his to the R-10 and I love it, if he doesn't like the Editions, which I'm still not so sure, that is his choice, I never ruled out his opinion, and nevr will, I may agree or not on them but never rule them out, but what? He is human, and any review is subjective, that is my point, he was trying ot make a review objective which is not, not his not any other...I do not see anything wrong on that neither....

Anyway blahhhhh!!!!! I'm sick of that stupid argument for the sake or arguing....
post #38 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
Rudi used to be very anti opamp and all about "correct spectral harmonic compensation" Whatever that was. Now his solid state products are covered with opamps. Wonder what happened.
Is this true ? When I was struggling between a Rudistor RPX-100 and a RSA Apache earlier this year, one of the consideration was that I would prefer a discrete amp design and my understanding from email exchanges with Rudi that the RPX-100 was discrete. So, I bought a PRX-100, and am happy so far.

Now, based on this statement from Kevin, can I ask for my money back ? Is this something I can go after Rudi for misleading me into a purchase ?

F. Lo
post #39 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
How do you know? So you have one schematic, or some pics of one amp, and you rule out the rest of the designs, there a lot of other designs that are not even in pictures, so I don't know how you know what is inside
Beating a dead horse just a little more,

I have pictures and schematics of virtually every single current rudistor
product and many of the older ones. Including pictures of the rp010
with the covers to all the boxes opened. And i'm willing to bet that
within a year i will have clear and detailed pictures of the rp1000,
suitable for generating a schematic from. With a proper flash you can
see right thru that circuit board without having to take the thing apart.

Only by studying the past can you possibly learn to do better in the future.
People are still studying John Curl and Nelson Pass 30 years later to
learn from what they have done. If a company attempts to hide something
they probably have a reason to do so. And not a good reason either.

At least the current rudistor amplifiers are much better made than the
old stuff, when you turn them upside down, no parts fall out.

If you have listened to a rudistor amp, like it, and have the money for
it, you should probably buy it. On the other hand there is much better
stuff out there for a lot less money. Especially if you are in the USA
where the dollar is getting beat up badly.
post #40 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by fkclo View Post
Is this true ? When I was struggling between a Rudistor RPX-100 and a RSA Apache earlier this year, one of the F. Lo

The input section that does the unbalance to balance conversion and
the balance to balance buffer is opamps. An interesting variant of a
circuit published in 1979.

Open it up and count the opamps. The 4 discrete amplifiers are pretty
simple. Apache circuit definitely very different from this circuit.

While i would personally never ever buy a ray samuels product, if the
apache and the rpx100 were the same price, the rudistor product would
clearly loose.
post #41 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
if the apache and the rpx100 were the same price, the rudistor product would clearly loose.
Hi Kevin,

Can you elaborate a bit more in what aspects will the RSA Apache be better ? I am especially interested in your views on how the Apache will soncially beat the RPX-100 ? Also, please let us know what other areas will the RPX-100 loose out to the Apache ?

F. Lo
post #42 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
The input section that does the unbalance to balance conversion and
the balance to balance buffer is opamps. An interesting variant of a
circuit published in 1979.

Open it up and count the opamps. The 4 discrete amplifiers are pretty
simple.
So, do you mean the Rudistor PRX-100 does use discrete design in the amp section, but use opamps in the preripherals ? In other words, can we still say the RPX-100 is still a discrete amp ? or a fake discrete design ?

Sorry for all these dump questions but I just want to understand better what qualifies as a discrete design, and what's not.

F. Lo
post #43 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin gilmore View Post
I have pictures and schematics of virtually every single current rudistor
product and many of the older ones. Including pictures of the rp010
with the covers to all the boxes opened. And i'm willing to bet that
within a year i will have clear and detailed pictures of the rp1000,
suitable for generating a schematic from. With a proper flash you can
see right thru that circuit board without having to take the thing apart.

Only by studying the past can you possibly learn to do better in the future.
Kevin, in this case do you have plans to offer something which bests the RP010 and RP1000 but at a more affordable price ? I haven't heard the PR010 and PR1000 and always think they are beyond my reach.

Given the wealth of information on your hand I would be keen to know about your product plans in the future. Can you shed some light on what to be expected over the horizon ?

F. Lo
post #44 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by fkclo View Post
Kevin, I would be keen to know about your product plans in the future. Can you shed some light on what to be expected over the horizon ?
I wasn't aware that Kevin Gilmore sold amps.

post #45 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovkiller View Post
Which product I sell? Rudistor does not sell any Ultrasone heapdhones, I'm recommneding the headphone I like and own, period...
I dunno...I've seen Edition9 + RPX-33 MKII bundles....even on amazon..(scroll down for recommendations)



http://www.amazon.com/Ultrasone-RPX-...560878-6289635

They're even sold by Ultrasone USA!!!

http://www.ultrasoneusa.com/rpx-33.html


You still tell me that theres no relationship? hehehehe
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) › Rudistor with Omega II.