I’m not “worried.” I just thought it could be helpful to others to know of other experiences regarding regenerators. Your observations are interesting. I wonder if you’ve heard the same thing from the later PS audio regenerators? I’ve heard similar comments to yours about the earlier models as well.
I’m not “worried.” I just thought it could be helpful to others to know of other experiences regarding regenerators. Your observations are interesting. I wonder if you’ve heard the same thing from the later PS audio regenerators? I’ve heard similar comments to yours about the earlier models as well.
No, I haven’t heard any of their current ones mostly because in principle nothing significant has changed from the previous generation. The other reason is my approach, I prefer fixing what is possible at the source and keep the connection to the wall basic and clean.
No, I haven’t heard any of their current ones mostly because in principle nothing significant has changed from the previous generation. The other reason is my approach, I prefer fixing what is possible at the source and keep the connection to the wall basic and clean.
Between the P5 and P12 the output impedance goes from .02 to .008. I don't know if that's a big change in terms of impedance. If so, I suppose it could account for a less homogenized sound through greater dynamics.
Between the P5 and P12 the output impedance goes from .02 to .008. I don't know if that's a big change in terms of impedance. If so, I suppose it could account for a less homogenized sound through greater dynamics.
What does that mean, impedance of what? Under load? What does that measurement have to do with the sound of a system? Is it a constant number or it varies with load and time? I don't think it matters at all, what's important is that you're happy with it.
What does that mean, impedance of what? Under load? What does that measurement have to do with the sound of a system? Is it a constant number or it varies with load and time? I don't think it matters at all, what's important is that you're happy with it.
A explanation from Paul McGowan...
I asked Paul McGowan, CEO of PS Audio, to comment on the apparent similarity of the measurements. He said that the big differences were not in distortion as such, but in how the distortion would vary depending on incoming level and use. The P12 and its siblings are more resistant to influence by these factors. Perhaps even more important is the lowering of output impedance, from about 0.05 ohm in the previous generation of Power Plants to 0.008 ohm in the current models. McGowan acknowledged that the difference "might not seem like a lot, but it is a big deal," the lower output impedance resulting in greater energy storage, peak current demand, and tighter energy regulation. "When an amplifier demands a quick burst of transient power, the straight wall socket can't deliver it without dipping in voltage," he explained. "And if a passive conditioner is attached, that gets even worse. But when the regenerator is there, it delivers the energy without batting an eye—and that's where the magic happens."
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/ps-audio-directstream-power-plant-12#YzrrLsTxlkbpr4rW.99
I think it's appropriate to ask "why is low impedance source important" because I'd say it isn't necessarily purely good thing. Sometimes being low is a bad thing. And it's possible for passive filtration to make a very stable playback, in ways other equipment can't. AC is just too complicated for absolutes.
Regenerators can keep voltage up more than the naked line, but that isn't the entire picture. There's more going on than that. For example with output impedance so low, there's a chance for a lot of resonances. Also we haven't seen their impedance across a wider range of frequencies. What is the SRF of these things? Lots of questions, lots of possibilities.
I maintain that it's a bit scary how much the powercord feeding a regenerator affects the sound.
McGowan acknowledged that the difference "might not seem like a lot, but it is a big deal," the lower output impedance resulting in greater energy storage, peak current demand, and tighter energy regulation. "When an amplifier demands a quick burst of transient power, the straight wall socket can't deliver it without dipping in voltage," he explained.
That's rubbish! What are we talking about here anyway, even if the voltage drops so what? How much does it drop? 0.1v? 1v? 2.2v? What gauge wire in the outlet? Amperage of breaker? What kind of amplifier? Etc., etc. you see where I'm going with this, it's a comment without any context.
"And if a passive conditioner is attached, that gets even worse. But when the regenerator is there, it delivers the energy without batting an eye—and that's where the magic happens."
Generally speaking amplifiers should be designed to be prepared for average amounts of sag between the AC & transformer itself, so that it doesn't disrupt the sound.
That's rubbish! What are we talking about here anyway, even if the voltage drops so what? How much does it drop? 0.1v? 1v? 2.2v? What gauge wire in the outlet? Amperage of breaker? What kind of amplifier? Etc., etc. you see where I'm going with this, it's a comment without any context.
I can tell you with 100% certainly that I have never come across a 120v or 230V with right sized breaker run out of juice feeding any of my systems.
Last thing I want to is do is waste time reading this dreck .
I have mono blocks that have 25 amp circuit breakers on each one and never have flipped either, much less heard them clip. Bottom line...if they improve the sound...that's good. I just believe, like I said...why condition ahead of the signal path when that doesn't effect the audio signal primarily.
They probably do. I just think it's a waste of money, half ass at best because primarily it does nothing to remove or address leakage current, SCIN, internal EMI, and system internal ground design problems or mismatches.
They probably do. I just think it's a waste of money, half ass at best because primarily it does nothing to remove or address leakage current, SCIN, internal EMI, and system internal ground design problems or mismatches.
AC conditioning reduces common mode noise typically as one of the biggest boons. That means there's a lot less garbage on the safety ground, which directly makes for a better complex impedance that would include SCIN and EMI spewing from certain things. Parasitics change, too, which has an affect on leakage.
You have to have equal potentials through out the system. That's what recording studios do at least the majors. Set up technical and isolation grounds to achieve that goal and cut common mode noise to a minor pct by following accepted known practices and procedures. That is the only way a system can achieve full fidelity of the audio signal. The potential must be the same between the recording studio and the Audiophile system or you will have less than true fidelity that was captured at the recording venue.
The design of the system will always be the deciding factor. That's why no two systems sound the same, but the knowledge exists to achieve audio signal purity to a greater degree.
Sounds to simple....I don't think so.
Potentials are dominated by the equipment before ground, because fluctuations in current and voltage use in the gear have the biggest effect. As long as they have good PSU’s then they should be decent. Back in the day they had no ground at all, and everything was ok. In some ways requirements for safety ground is one of the worst things to happen to studios. They have to deploy all these techniques to stop a lot of the problems having safety ground creates. They may have had a little more noise in some studios, but others had relatively none from loop problems - it wasn’t abnormal for people not to know why as even today it can be confusing.
Lowering ground resistance increases common mode noise up to the point of bonding the PSU to the safety ground (if it does). It reduces some across interconnects, but not too much because the shield resistance path can be less, too, because of the lower resistance connections. If there was no safety ground there wouldn’t be any common mode noise. But RF pickup is lower - sadly it probably doesn’t matter unless they’re close to a tower.
Studios worry about hum, but not as much about potentials. They have a lot of cables and gear. It can be hard to track down loops. So clear and obvious bonding takes out guess work. The direct bonding reduces loops based on how much less resistive they are than the loop. And they reduce some SCIN - but that’s a secondary thing, they have long cables but usually not that long for SCIN to be a real big deal.
The loop gain is pretty sensitive to hum. Hum is audible if it gets in. While there’s gain, it’s not super high past the mic preamp, so the stability of the power supplies is pretty easy to maintain compared to audio amps - especially since it’s all low current. The linearity of volume isn’t likely to shift since there’s almost no fluctuations in current use in this gear. Bonding helps with power fluctuations but it’s kind of a cheap trick since the fluctuations come from bad, shared power (primarily). To any good study it’s more of a redundancy because they have something to provide all the power at a stable voltage, and don’t share grounds with other circuits.
Looks like I'll be purchasing the Torus RM 20 BAL. Wondering if Ron or anyone out there knows of any "audiophile" grade 240 V receptacle or power cord that exists? Is this even a bit overkill? Thanks.
Yes, exactly — a 240VAC unit. Plus dedicated 100 amp run to dedicated breaker box and the JPS in-wall AC cable and that absurdly expensive dual chemical ground (which allegedly did achieve a very low resistance to ground even in the very dry earth of Los Angeles).
I am looking at Torus AVR 60 Balanced (total overkill for front-end components).
I would be very happy to! Check back with me in about a year when I have the system set up and I can (and my friend’s can help me) evaluate that comparison.
.
