I couldn’t agree with you more! The music just flowed from the PSA and also had a fullness about it. When you switched back to it all we talked about was the music! That’s what it’s all about!
Equi=Tech 2RQ Versus PS Audio P10
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
The two are very different and if you use a power plant there is no point to use an iso or bal after it. There is a benifit before it but again not enough to warrant it.
Of it was me Ron get a 20kw outdoor balanced iso. Install in the shade. All plugs into it.
I wound use two panels in your room. One for amps and one for the rest. Both fed from the iso. This way as the amps get busy it will not effect the second panel for the rest.
A 20kw or even 30 kw is way above the needs and can handle 3 times this rating in short time based pulses and have little to no effect to be measured. Key to this is a star ground and an isolated one just for your panels
No outside grounds used. If you need a cable modem or network use a emo hosp grade network iso to keep it off the grid electrically.
Of it was me Ron get a 20kw outdoor balanced iso. Install in the shade. All plugs into it.
I wound use two panels in your room. One for amps and one for the rest. Both fed from the iso. This way as the amps get busy it will not effect the second panel for the rest.
A 20kw or even 30 kw is way above the needs and can handle 3 times this rating in short time based pulses and have little to no effect to be measured. Key to this is a star ground and an isolated one just for your panels
No outside grounds used. If you need a cable modem or network use a emo hosp grade network iso to keep it off the grid electrically.
Now trialing a Torus 3800kva AVR16 that is designed for 16 amps/3800kva steady output with capability to handle bursts of up to something like 300amps. The Gryphon Mephisto is plugged into it...AFTER checking first with Gryphon Head of Service, and also checking with 3 owners of Gryphons as well as Distributor of Torus. All were happy there was sufficient headroom in the Torus. The Gryphon is designed for steady high output of 10amps and 2400kva.
I find this whole thread very disturbing. Ron clearly reports an effect that IMHO is not possible with the Lamm equipment - a 3dB objective measurement of gain change when changing just the mains power source. IMHO until this question is properly addressed all the conclusions from this listening test should be considered with great care.
It is usual in stereo that small immensurable changes affect our subjective perception of loudness and then we are faced with the dilemma if we should comparatively listen at the same objective level or adjust levels for equal subjective level perception. I have read good arguments defending both positions. But in this case we are told that Ron used an instrument to check levels and 3dB is an huge difference - I would say a nigh and day case.
Yes, Ron, IMHO it can'be! Can you help us explaining what was happening?
Why do you feel compelled to plug the amp into the Torus? Just as a matter of curiosity and experiment?
I have no idea whatsoever. I am baffled by it, and I am disturbed by it as well. It makes no sense. Even if we call it to 2dB it still makes no sense. Yet, it was obvious to each of us.
If I read this posted by someone I would be:
If you were really serious about 3db louder that implies double the amplifier power was available to the listened-to passages. A regenerator v. isolation transformer isn't going to fuel that. However, the subjective inducers of perceived volume difference can be orthogonal to the facts. You could say, "...you kinda had to be there..." and that would be as subjectively valid as anything. Measuring the output voltage differences between the two device is unlikely to account for a 3db difference, which requires a doubling of power. But the perception of volume difference driven by what you heard in relative dynamics might have influenced what you believe you heard. Measured loudness differences and perceived loudness differences can be quite different, and nonsensical on the face of the available evidence.I have no idea whatsoever. I am baffled by it, and I am disturbed by it as well. It makes no sense. Even if we call it to 2dB it still makes no sense. Yet, it was obvious to each of us.
If I read this posted by someone I would be:
Phil
I have no idea whatsoever. I am baffled by it, and I am disturbed by it as well. It makes no sense. Even if we call it to 2dB it still makes no sense. Yet, it was obvious to each of us.
If I read this posted by someone I would be:
Then in all fairness we should ignore all the comparative comments on this listening session until the matter is settled. How many times did you switch the power supplies? Subjective evaluation requires a minimum of objective conditions.
I have been faced with a similar problem when I see people evaluating the 4 and 8 ohms taps in valve amplifiers. Most people want to do it without compensating for volume levels, ignoring that gain at the 8 ohm tap is significantly higher, strongly biasing the comparison. Sometimes when I advise to compensate gain people accuse me that I am prejudicing the 8 ohm tap and insist on not touching the volume control to keep exactly the "same" conditions! BTW, this compensation needs a meter - due to the change in impedance of the output of the amplifier between taps, we can't just reduce volume by the theoretical open loop - 3dB, typically the difference being something around 1-2 dB.
What a ridiculous statement. We did compensate for the volume, look at my comments. 3 experienced audiophiles with 80+ years experience owning systems and visiting shows reported back what they heard. If that's not enough for you, I suggest you move on to another thread.
The volume difference was both perceived and measured. What other proof would you require?
I think that even different voltages could not explain such difference with Lamm equipment. However the second hypothesis must be seriously considered. Ron expected an higher sound level due to the group subjective findings, he unconsciously picked one position/moment when the sound level was 3 dB higher. As you know, I always object to hand held comparative sound level or quality measurements, a fixed stand is the minimum needed for equal opportunity.
Last edited:
I regret that you make aggressive comments on the quality of my remark and fail to debate the intrinsic problem of your comparative listening.
1. Objectively nothing could change the electrical and sound power when changing power supply - if you disagree I will be very happy to learn from you or others in this forum.
2. If 1 is true and you compensated the volume you were making a comparison at a 3 db different objective volume level. If it does not worry you, probably it will worry others.
I will be very happy to discuss my technical points and I hope other members are also interested in it. I can't understand this desire to stay in the dark on very important aspects of our hobby. Even Ron wrote specifically he could not understand what was happening - his question was what triggered my attention to these strange aspect.
Its the old Sherlock Holmes saying..."Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." If the 3db decibel increase did occur, then we have to ask WHY.
Was one unit LOUDER than the other? Or is that another way of saying one unit was SOFTER? Power-wise, 3db is a lot...but perhaps it was not POWER per se that created the delta in volume. Was there some kind of filtration of some kind that resulted in reducing volume by 2-3db?
Was one unit LOUDER than the other? Or is that another way of saying one unit was SOFTER? Power-wise, 3db is a lot...but perhaps it was not POWER per se that created the delta in volume. Was there some kind of filtration of some kind that resulted in reducing volume by 2-3db?
Unfortunately the concept of impossible is not the same in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle narrative and in WBF objective claims ...
There are simple possible explanations for what is being reported, and IMHO they are quite probable. But people must be prepared to discuss them and face the consequences of them.
And no, IMHO no kind of mains filtration can reduce the output level by 3 dB. Can you imagine level varying by 3 dB while you are listening due your next door neighbors switching their electrical devices on and off?
I am particularly concerned that analog and Lamm equipment was used in this experiment - sometimes equipment using digitally controlled volume controls go crazy and display wrong levels when equipment in switched on and off due to transients - it happened with some specif models of Audio Research and conrad johnson preamplfiers, only solved by the manufacturer a few months after launch. It could easily explain everything, but Lamm uses very high quality potentiometers, absolutely glitch proof .
I think that even different voltages could not explain such difference with Lamm equipment. However the second hypothesis must be seriously considered. Ron expected an higher sound level due to the group subjective findings, he unconsciously picked one position/moment when the sound level was 3 dB higher. As you know, I always object to hand held comparative sound level or quality measurements, a fixed stand is the minimum needed for equal opportunity.
I'm sorry but you should measure the output on each. You need to be able to rule things out, not just "find what you're looking for" or make stuff up until it is what you want. Higher voltage in gear can mean more voltage ( more potential wattage )
Surely, but we do not have these measurements. Anyway what is being addressed is a change in gain due to mains supply, it is mainly what is being discussed.
Are you suggesting the amplifiers were being operated in clipping mode? I do not think so.
Surely - accepted by everyone since long
. But IMHO it is not relevant to what is being reported.Similar threads
