[Annihilator]

I find it amusing that in this thread the claim of RS amps having rolled off highs is based primarily on it producing less tape hiss. Come on people, if you're going to complain about the supposed rolled off highs, atleast use a case where it is actually lessening the quality of sound and not improving it.

 

[Jahn]

Personally I didn't experience any sense of rolled off highs with the SR-71. The RA-1 is very bright and peaky in the highs yet I can't say it gave any more info up the spectrum than the SR-71. If anything, the SR-71 gave you the same (if not more extended) highs, in a blacker than black presentation without getting muddy/losing detail. The RA-1 seemed to be thinner and harsher and brighter. But higher? Sonic illusion.

 

[dokebi]

Maybe the potentiometer has something to do with it. The 100k radioshack pot that the ra1 amp uses sounds bright on all of the diy amps that I built. I also noticed that the panasonic pots tend to sound a bit mushy.

 

[gsferrari]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GainHead RS had an opportunity to deny the claim and he did not, so that is a fairly good indicator that the AD8610/BUF634 combination is correct

LOL

You guys crack me up. Why the hell should he comment ? He painted them over because he didnt want you guys to find out. And you expect him to confirm your "guess" ?? Is this one of those games where you guess and hope to hit a home run?

Hilarious - keep the jokes coming

Quote:

Other factors also indicate this combination is correct. RS admitted the SR-71 uses a buffer. What other buffer besides the BUF634 are you aware of that he could be using?

I dont know...I dont care - thats intellectual property and it is up to him to choose to reveal it or not. Have you asked him? Has he given you an answer? If he hasnt then I think you can infer that this line of questioning is not welcome and move on

Quote:

Also, the SR-71 reportedly can last up to 60 hours with alkaline batteries according to RS. At best you get about 340mA from two 9 volt alkalines. Assuming just quiescent current and full battery drain, what other combination of buffer and op-amp could possibly last this long?

Yay! Now you're talking. Maybe you are right...maybe you are wrong...does it matter to me? Neh!

Keep the guesses coming. The point is - he is protecting his design and so far you have guesses and maybes floating around. I am not dissing you and actually applaud your deductive ability. It really is amusing though how the human mind works...

Just like piracy...copying media is a crime - people do it anyway

Attempting to copy his design is not a crime - because it is easy to copy even without looking at his amp - pick up the data-sheets and go from there...you can have the SR-71 design in under 30 minutes including phone calls to manufacturers for certain optimization questions.

But I am ROTFLMFAO at the way this red pain has you guys in a bind here

Good one ray...make them sweat

Every manufacturer who values their business and intellectual property should take similar steps to stop you guys.

Why cant you get creative and come up with your own designs anyway?

Op-Amps are at the end of the road...nothing new here anymore...do something with transistors or anything novel

 

[GainHead]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsferrari Why cant you get creative and come up with your own designs anyway?

I'm not trying to copy his design, I was just pointing out to the earlier statement that the opamps/buffers in the SR-71 are known. I think RS painted over them because it is a very obvious choice, not because he was trying to hide a novel design choice.

 

[Ray Samuels]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GainHead Yes, we do. It is the AD8610 and BUF634. See here: http://headwize.com/ubb/showpage.php?fnum=3&tid=5276

Gain head...
If you are the same person in the headwise called "PURE", & accusing me of what you tried in that thread, all I can say is you are a real sick person, you are mad at me becuase you wanted information on how the SR-71 was built & how the batteries were implemented & whether I have copling caps in the signal path through so many e-mails, & because I kindly refused to give this info, you started to stir all kind of troubles, I do not know how old are you, if you are very young, I won't mind your mentality, but if you are old enough, I would say that you need a lot of growing up to do. I did not admit any thing to you at all, & did not tell you what op-amps I used, you came to the decision of your own. I am really getting sick of reading all these sickining posts about rolled off highs, & mid range being over emphezised, if it sounds that way to your ear then change the op-amp in the amp & put your favorite in there & the problem is solved, Why do you think I put the IC sockets in the first place? If you want the graphs of the frequency go to my web site & see the Emmeline CA2, it is the same circuit as the HR-2 & uses the same op-amp AD797 & read the review of one of the greates writer Dick Olsher regardind the sound, but the later, HR-2, has the buffer to drive the load. I am really thinking very seriously to stop this none sense of making headphone amps once for all, as I am getting nothing from it eccept pain in the neck. You don't like it don't buy the amp, how simple can it get. If you dont like the sound of my amp then you will never ever like the sound of Meridian 508 24 bit CD player, that is the sound that I trust & voice my amps accordingly.
Why would you want the schematic of the SR-71 if it is that bad sounding? why do you want it so bad ? you need some real HELP my friend.
Ray Samuels

 

[ampgalore]

There is voicing in the amplifier world, including the headphone amplifier world.

Many stereo amplifier manufacturers deliberately voice their amplifiers to make them take on a certain sound signature.

Personal experience on hand. Rotel voices their amps to have rolled off highs, and bloated lows, to make their solid state amps take on a tube amplifier sound signature. I was so disgusted with this approach, I sold off that Rotel amp the week I purchased it.

The older Classe amps do the same thing.


And like Ray Sammuels himself said, he VOICES his headphone amps. From what I heard, I am assuming he is trying to voice his solid state headphone amps to take on a tube amplifier signature, with rolled off highs and lows, and a bloated midrange.

And please don't sugar coat the high frequency noise issue and the tape hiss issue that the HR-2 and the XP-7 failed to reproduce. The Grace 901 is a far better constructed, far more neutral, true to the source, headphone amp, than either the HR-2 or the XP-7. The fact that Ray Sammuel's amps failed to reproduce these high frequency noise indicates that the audiable spectrum is NOT being faithfully reproduced.

Grace 901 is a studio monitor grade headphone amplifier. Try using the HR-2 in your studio monitoring, and see what kind of skewed results you'll get.

And an amplifier's job is to amplify the source signal. Please stop saying that Ray Sammuels' amps after ampflication can actually make the source signal sound better than the original source signal. If that is the case, there is some SERIOUS coloration going on here, and the amplifcation is FAR from neutral.

 

[mjg]

ampsgalore:

I see a few problems here.

You seem pragmatic in trying to explain to us an amps job is to reproduce or amplify noise? What planet are you on? Do we buy headphone amps to enjoy a blasted and noise problem?

Look, i see you have been around for a while, i've read many of your posts, and see you frequently change your amps up and not sure what you want in particular. I think you are probablly very difficult to please, and may never be happy. How on earth you came to the decision an amps job is to "simply amplify" is pretty much an issue to yourself. Ray had an idea of how audio should sound, and people buy his products who seem to enjoy that. No amplifer i've compared head-to-head such as gsferrari suggest sounds the same. I certainly think of you are saying an HR2 sounds just the same as a PPA, you are dead wrong. I had the 2 of them sitting in my room for about a month.

Ask ray or PPL, both of whom i give much respect how and why i made my decision to keep one vs the other. They don't sound the same, sorry guys.
Everyone here has an opinion, and you know your entitled to yours, but i just simply cannot understand your reasoning. In the end the amps job is to make the owner happy, and i'm not quite sure what on earth you want out of an amp?

Good luck finding it.

 

[ampgalore]

If there is noise in the source signal, then the amplifer's job is to faithfully amplify that noise.

If there is tape hiss in the source signal, then the amplifier's job is to faithfully amplify that tape hiss.

An amplifier's job is to amplify the source signal, nothing more, nothing less.


Up to date, an amplifier that has the ability to selectively reject noise and reject tape hiss, has not yet been invented. Maybe it has, but this advanced capability certainly is not to be found in the HR-2, XP-7.

I don't understand what is so difficult to understand about this concept. Unless you like to hear a distorted signal.

 

[mjg]

i'm not going to attack you or give you a strong debate even.


I totally disagree with you. I have no idea why you would make an invetment in an audio product, if in the end it's job was simple as you suggest. I wouldn't buy any "gimmicks", hell i'd probablly have no amp at all, since all amps are the same in their essence (as to what there purpose is)? I think tube amps and all the rolling buisness would be moot as well. I think it might add to your point if you said this is your opinion of an amps purpose.
I think the notion is sort of ridiculous, since it's apoint of fact that most hobbyists here do have a particular goal of a sound, and typically approach it, or have found it. No one i know of spending a vast amount of bux settles for something of strong dislike. That's where i wrap back to my point, do you really like headphones at all (after owning so many drasticly different types of amps)

I noticed your buying a speaker setup? I believe you aren't happy with headphones and their amps in general? Also, your the one who is nitpicking about a distorted signal that you WANT to hear? Doesn't this seem a bit hypocritical to make such a comment (that i want to hear this...)?

I'm not applying sarcasm, i'm asking you an honest question.

 

[ampgalore]

You will be surprised how hard and how expensive it is to achieve that "simple" faithful, true to the source, amplifcation.

 

[markl]

Quote:

And an amplifier's job is to amplify the source signal. Please stop saying that Ray Sammuels' amps after ampflication can actually make the source signal sound better than the original source signal. If that is the case, there is some SERIOUS coloration going on here, and the amplifcation is FAR from neutral.

Who said that? Must have missed that comment.

You failed to respond to the argument that tape hiss contains information in more than just the treble region, and the possible issue of compression in other amps you've heard. Quote:

Grace 901 is a studio monitor grade headphone amplifier. Try using the HR-2 in your studio monitoring, and see what kind of skewed results you'll get.

LOL. Anyone can choose to sell audio products into the studio market or the consumer market. There aren't different standards for each, special "studio-only" circuits and designs, different equipment used to test and measure each, or entirely different lines of components used for "studio grade" gear and audiophile gear. "No, sorry Headroom, you can't order those parts for your amp line, those are reserved strictly for studio-bound gear only."

Dude, that's the equivalent of looking at the headphone package that says "for Digital" and buying into it completely! As if there's some special sauce in those headphones that makes them extra double super compatible with CD players. LOL.

 

[gsferrari]

ampgalore - ever thought of the hiss as a ground related problem?

I cannot give your words any credit because I have heard these amps personally and dont hear ANY of these symptoms. I apologize to you if this sounds like I am saying you are a liar - I am NOT.

However - my hearing tells me that these amps are fine and better than you guys seem to portray. This makes me very happy

I am walking away from this debate as it is baseless without proof. Make frequency response curves of Emmeline amplifiers and then carry on your tirade. Without this hard data - you can take your tape hiss and shove it up where the sun dont shine.

Give me data and I will accept your flagrant bashing of what I consider a pretty darn good product.

 

[archosman]

You know ampgalore if you're going to criticize at least have the common courtesy to spell Ray's name correctly. Here... let me help you

See... nice little navbar gif? See how it's spelled? It's easy. You know just like a young child it needs to be repeated for it to sink in. Ready? Here we go...

Again! Hopefully know you can bookmark this page so that everytime you need to spell Ray Samuels you can do it with confidence. I have faith in you ampgalore. Don't let us down.

By the way... you might want to see and audiologist about your ears. I think it's possible you have tinnitus or you're hearing frequencies rolled off. Good luck with the spelling and call a doctor for pete's sake! Hearing isn't something to mess around with son...

 

[mjg]

you say this as it's some sort of stipulation, that there is a true?

You have a very closed mind if you find it true that there is one truth in this world.

My friend, there is no "truth", or more directly, a "true sound".

To me this sounds more like an audio gimmick that you scoff at.

p.s) Archosman, you don't need to slam an insult like him at that. If anything that enables him to get upset, and totally devalue our conversation we were trying to have.