New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Panda amp - Page 3

post #31 of 40


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claus-DK View Post

I understand the nerdfactor very well, after all I am one, and the amp, could prabably be even better with some tweaks here and there, but the thing is, it is already very very good, so why bother ??

If you end up "only" getting an amp that is better on paper and sonicly inferior, then what has been gained ??

 

By all means I love improvements, but I just think it is the wrong way to do things, build it and then start tweaking it..If we just tweak it before we build it we cannot know if it is better..



 

the converse is that engineers are trained to use their knowledge of the state of the art to be able to reliably design circuits and choose parts to achieve some performance goal - did the original designer do any more than select the cheapest output Q that can handle the power - or do yau have evidence that they are carefully "voiced" by some audiophile "guru"?

 

taking measurable accuracy of signal amplification as a goal, and available parts suitable for the circuit topology - changing to 10x faster, flat hfe output Q and even faster, smaller driver Q would enable >10x less audio frequency distortion in the given circuit with "safe" adjustment of the compensation

 

there is little point in claiming you must listen to everything 1st before trying what engineering principles suggest gives better measurable performance - unless you propose to go through the 100's of transistor model # that would "work" in the circuit topology with careful subjective listening evaluation between all pairings?


Edited by jcx - 11/17/10 at 7:00am
post #32 of 40

From what I have seen of the products from HiFiDIY (where this amp is from), they have

some good ideas and engineering blunders in most of their designs. I have one of

their DACs and while most of it seems designed well, the ground driver is designed

really badly. In the end, it sounds OK but how much better would it have sounded

done right?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claus-DK View Post

I understand the nerdfactor very well, after all I am one, and the amp, could prabably be even better with some tweaks here and there, but the thing is, it is already very very good, so why bother ??

If you end up "only" getting an amp that is better on paper and sonicly inferior, then what has been gained ??

 

By all means I love improvements, but I just think it is the wrong way to do things, build it and then start tweaking it..If we just tweak it before we build it we cannot know if it is better..



 

the converse is that engineers are trained to use their knowledge of the state of the art to be able to reliably design circuits and choose parts to achieve some performance goal - did the original designer do any more than select the cheapest output Q that can handle the power - or do yau have evidence that they are carefully "voiced" by some audiophile "guru"?

 

taking measurable accuracy of signal amplification as a goal, and available parts suitable for the circuit topology - changing to 10x faster, flat hfe output Q and even faster, smaller driver Q would enable >10x less audio frequency distortion in the given circuit with "safe" adjustment of the compensation

 

there is little point in claiming you must listen to everything 1st before trying what engineering principles suggest gives better measurable performance - unless you propose to go through the 100's of transistor model # that would "work" in the circuit topology with careful subjective listening evaluation between all pairings?

post #33 of 40

JCX:

I know perfectly well what you are talking about, I have the same problem when eating icecream, I study them long and hard before eating them, as you might guess I have been producing icecream in my working life..

 

But I also do suspect that we do not know everything and I do not know if things can have synergi when paired up, which is better than using the "right" parts ??

 

Next time you are at Macdonalds try ordering a strawberry milkshake and use it to dip your french fries in, you will be surpriced with the result, which is very hard to believe before you try it...

 

Anyway I was in no way out to get or offend you, just wanted to provoke a bit and get a little more life into the thread, hope you can forgive me beerchug.gif

 

post #34 of 40

I actually attended a "Ice Cream Seminar"  in college - an excuse to explore off campus - I have had Lowenbrau beer ice cream, and Fritos as mix-ins are among the more memorable

post #35 of 40

 How this amp work with high-resistance phones (300-600ohms)?

post #36 of 40

Very well, I have bulidt one with different output resitors one for low ohmic an done for high ohmic phones, it drives almost everything quite well.

post #37 of 40

got my shovel out and dug up this old thread.

anyone try this with lcd-2 or other orthos ?

post #38 of 40

will take that as a "no" then?

will be ordering my lcd-2 tomorrow, so will find out soon enough

post #39 of 40

If I remember correct it can pump out 3,75 Watts, so it should have enough power for the orthos

post #40 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claus-DK View Post

If I remember correct it can pump out 3,75 Watts, so it should have enough power for the orthos

just to round off this thread, the Panda/lcd-2 combo kicks the arse out of my d7000 smily_headphones1.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home