Power Supply units!

[naturephoto1]

Curious as to who the "we" is that knows an ARC LS-10 is better than a Ref 3?? I am going to take a wild guess and say you modded the snot out of it. If so, what did you do? How do you know that a larger power supply would improve your Sansui tuner? A tuner is not swinging much voltage nor is it carrying a lot of current. When you do your mods to your gear, are you making any actual circuit changes or just parts swapping?

Hi,

I do not want to have another situation of getting hammered regarding who and what is done with much of my equipment to improve the performance. I will send you a PM. But, yes the ARC LS10 has been fairly heavily modified. Much of the work in this and other pieces of equipment has included replacement of improved parts, installation of shielding, damping and quite probably filters to lessen noise, etc. As to the question of the modified Sansui TU-9900 that is a guess but it may be incorrect.

Rich

 

[silviajulieta]

Is it me or am I seeing more and more people using seperate power supplies for various components? Is this really necessary or just another marketing ploy to get us to part with dollars?

John

Dear John: IMHO it is possible to design in " one box " ( example ) the LLI signature Lamm line stage ( or other brand multibox unit. ) and if you or any one else heard/hear it " bis a bis " we can't/couldn't detect any quality performance difference.

But at least two things happen with that " one box " design: first the customer will be less " interested " in the item because he could think that a " one box " unit can't be a Signature/top/first rate line stage performer and either his audio friends that will see it when the unit be integrated at customer home system, this customer has to be " proud " of what he bought: because of the high price$$$$ and because " looks impressive ".

In the other side the manufacturer can't charge all that separates design money in only " one box ". No, I'm not against commercial audio business of any one.

We are part of the AHEE that has many kind of rules/myths, the multi-boxes is one of those rules in marketing. Of course that exist audio item designs that are/has top level/wise design and could needs the PS separate: by design not marketing.

Dr. Sean Olive refer on other thread that one Revel distributor/dealer told him a complaint: " we can't increment/improve our sales because the Revel price is not higher enough "!!!!!! AHEE rules.

We customers are the ones that accept those AHEE rules/myths, sometimes because is " easy " to live with and many times because our low/poor know how.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[steve williams]

Raul

I own the Lamm LL1 Signature and it is a dual mono 4 box system with each channel having it's own power supply

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul

I own the Lamm LL1 Signature and it is a dual mono 4 box system with each channel having it's own power supply

Dear Steve: My reference was only to shows an example, could be a different brand/model.

Now that you are here please let me ask you: if that line stage unit ( same quality performance ) came it in one box for 4K instead four boxes and high K $$$$$$ dollars: do/would you still bought/buy it? , I know a tough question/answer. Could be a good " exercise " for some of us think which could be a " honest "/non-biased/quick/no-compromise but our self answer.

I know that some of us could answer: no I don't buy it. Nothing wrong with this answer.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[steve williams]

If Vladimir could make the same unit in one box with the same sound I would buy it in a heartbeat as it occupies a lot of landscape in my system.

 

[silviajulieta]

If Vladimir could make the same unit in one box with the same sound I would buy it in a heartbeat as it occupies a lot of landscape in my system.

Dear Steve: I can assume that your answer is a non-compromise but your self. Well, IMHO things are that that could happen ( a similar quality one box unit. ) and I wonder why we customers always " accept " what is out there with no single complaints. Whom convince us that what we buy is what we must to buy it?

My point is that we customers can make that the whole audio industry improve better and faster that what we have today in benefit not only of our each day music enjoyment but in benefit of the whole audio industry where we all belongs.

The power supply subject is only an example there are a lot of other examples where what we can " achieve "/buy is only different higher price audio items but not really better audio items. I think that we customers need ( someway. ) to change our " passive " ( other than buy. ) status to a more active one for the audio industry works to fullfill our real needs: the real customer audio/music needs.

I can be wrong with this kind of thinking but this is my believe about.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

Dear naturephoto1: +++++++ " Larger and separate Power Supplies can have a definite benefit to the performance. " +++++

IMHO what determine performance is the good or not so good design. The PS in an audio system must be designed to achieve that performance level and to mantain an equilibrium whole performance item under real working " circumstances ".

You like me know several " overkill " audio item PS that does not help in anyway and that can even goes against overall quality. Just imagine a Honda Civic with a rocket motor!!!

There are many " problems ", myths and marketing oriented products in the high end industry that not only does not help to the own audio item quality performance but that makes prices goes higher and higher with out no real contribution to improve the music/sound reproduction.

Btw, my Phonolinepreamp comes/has a separate PS: I need too " credibility "!.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

There is also some possibility of mechanical vibrations from the power transformers due to movement of the coils and magnetostriction (bulk expansion and contracton of magnetic material in a magnetic field). These mechanical vibrations can transfer noise to the signal circuit.

Also, as someone has already mentioned, stray magnetic fields can get into the signal circuit. There is generally no spec on the external magnetic field and so it can vary from transformer to transformer even within the same product code. A design can be prototyped around one sample of a transformer, but when it's transfered to production the design is vulnerable to the supplier's manufacturing variations.

Best to just have a separate power supply.

Dear Smokester: There are lots of whys to go separate but IMHO there is no single objective/subjective scientific studies that can prove the quality performance " improve " with separate PS against inn-box PS.
I don't know any single full tests where one person or an audio experienced people panel conclude ( with the same audio item design but the inn-box and separate PS. ) that with separate PS they heard an improvement in the audio item quality performance.

So for me this is more a marketing" myth " than a true truthful.

Now the good " hope " in the overall subject is that some good audio electronic designer ( better if it is one of the " big names/brands ". ) take the " bull by its horns " and with humility shows that that ( one box ) can be is real and can perform at same level or even better that " separates ".

Who knows maybe in a near future some " brave " designer comes and show us?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul

I own the Lamm LL1 Signature and it is a dual mono 4 box system with each channel having it's own power supply

Dear Steve: I can't find where to post ( again ) next thoughts about your " close threads policy " that I was unaware, that I can't understand yet and that happen to me twice in only one week that be in this forum:

a forum like this one IMHO is like a movie theather, where we choose which threads/pictures to post and when, we choose which posts we want reply and when, we choose even not participate in threads but only read it, we ....., etc, etc, etc.

Like in a movie theater that we must pay our ticket to go inside/come in here like in any other internet forum we pay for " come in " even if we don't participate: we buy our each one ticket when we made click in the " mouse " and start to navigate through the forum, even the ones that want to post buy a second ticket when we login.

All the " visitors " to the forum take and use part of each one value time reading, participating and learning.

In a movie thether all the people attend to has the right to see the picture and the movie theather never close the " movie " at the middle of the playback.

As in this forum in a movie theather there are rules that we must respect and if not they can " put its hand on any of us " for we respect those rules or leave/left the movie theather but they don't " punish " all the people attend to enjoy that picture but only whom don't respect the rules.

In this forum IMHO you don't only don't respect each single person in the thread but you don't respect either hundreds maybe thousands of people that does not post but are following the thread with deep interest.

All these IMHO is unfortunate for say the least.

I would like that you look to these forum " numbers ":

In the forum and below " General Audio Discussions " there are 20 different threads where two of them are close that represent only the 10%.

Well the total visitors/views to all 20 threads are ( at the moment/time I take it ) 12,138 and 5,069 of that total comes from those 10%/2 closed threads, this is around the 42% of the total!!!!!!

The total replies in those same 20 threads are 759 where 339 ones comes only from those 10%/2 closed thread, this represents almost the 45% of the total!!! and just only in two threads.

These " numbers " can/could tell you something, don't you think?

I totally agree with you that a debate must be civil one, no doubt about.

In that context each one of us are responsable of each one post/answers and we don't need ( because we are mature adults ) that be treated like a kindergarden childs.

The second thread you closed was because Ron ask for it telling you that it is " dangerous to the forum " ( or something like that ) that two " moderators " person were asking personal information ( name ) to other thread member when some of you not only disclose your ID/name but even ( this is dangerous! ) post you picture here!!!!!!????????? but even all that the person ( Phelonious Ponk ) decide not to disclose his ID: so what's Ron problem?, a delicate person by the way.

You can decide what you can think is the better for the forum but please take in count that we ( thousands of people ) deserve and ask for each one respect in the same way you ask for it.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[steve williams]

Raul

I appreciate and understand your points as I have indeed thought of them. I know the statistics of each thread on a daily basis so I was not closing those very busy threads without clear knowledge of how busy. However when it resorts to name calling, back stabbing or mine is larger than yours type discussion, then IMHO then thread has not served its purpose and is now derailed and off topic. In fact one of the threads "Is it too late for Analog" was issued a warning and advised to get back on topic which it did for a while and then the same thing happened. Even kids at some point need a time out or sent to their room.

The sad thing was the Too late For Analog thread was started by a friend of mine in Dallas who has similar speakers as mine. so yes, it bothered me too..

Here is what I suggest.. I am prepared to open both of those if that is the general consensus but once again Raul with all the typical and usual admonitions. if it happens again the result will be the same with members now being issued warnings

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul

I appreciate and understand your points as I have indeed thought of them. I know the statistics of each thread on a daily basis so I was not closing those very busy threads without clear knowledge of how busy. However when it resorts to name calling, back stabbing or mine is larger than yours type discussion, then IMHO then thread has not served its purpose and is now derailed and off topic. In fact one of the threads "Is it too late for Analog" was issued a warning and advised to get back on topic which it did for a while and then the same thing happened. Even kids at some point need a time out or sent to their room.

The sad thing was the Too late For Analog thread was started by a friend of mine in Dallas who has similar speakers as mine. so yes, it bothered me too..

Here is what I suggest.. I am prepared to open both of those if that is the general consensus but once again Raul with all the typical and usual admonitions. if it happens again the result will be the same with members now being issued warnings

Dear Steve: Thank's for your courtesy and understanding. I know that you are entitled to make of this forum " the best " and through thread debates not always is easy to " decide " what is right or wrong or what " cross the line ".
Any people debate, like this forum, has an " emotional charges " and not always everyone can see " your cross-line " exactly like you see it. So a " warning " always help.

My opinion on the subject is with the free/non biased help attitude.

Thank's again.

regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[steve williams]

As I said I opened the thread for you.

 

[The Smokester]

Dear Smokester: There are lots of whys to go separate but IMHO there is no single objective/subjective scientific studies that can prove the quality performance " improve " with separate PS against inn-box PS.
I don't know any single full tests where one person or an audio experienced people panel conclude ( with the same audio item design but the inn-box and separate PS. ) that with separate PS they heard an improvement in the audio item quality performance.

So for me this is more a marketing" myth " than a true truthful.

Now the good " hope " in the overall subject is that some good audio electronic designer ( better if it is one of the " big names/brands ". ) take the " bull by its horns " and with humility shows that that ( one box ) can be is real and can perform at same level or even better that " separates ".

Who knows maybe in a near future some " brave " designer comes and show us?

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Raul, I think it is a matter of what engineering design, production and maintenance issues the designer/manufacturer wants to take on for a given level of performance. I should tell you that both my line stage and phono stage are Wavestream tubed one-box solutions each. I chose them after a lot of listening and measurement comparison and one of the comparisons was with the corresponding Aesthetix Signature units which are a two-box solution. I also observed the design process for the Wavestream units, participated in some of it to a very minor degree and have been an alpha and beta tester for them (which is the only way I can afford to play at this level). So you are right that a one-box solution can be comparable to a two-box solution at the highest level but are wrong that no experienced listeners have compared the two.

Based on my (limited) experience, the two-box (or four-box like the Lamm) solution is better in the pure engineering sense. The one-box solution makes for design and production expenses which are not obvious unless you actually try to do it. The Wavestream is proof that a high-performing, one-box solution can be done but it is not easy. They set as a design constraint that their units would be one-box and took on the design, production and expense issues that came with that decision.

Best, John

 

[silviajulieta]

Raul, I think it is a matter of what engineering design, production and maintenance issues the designer/manufacturer wants to take on for a given level of performance. I should tell you that both my line stage and phono stage are Wavestream tubed one-box solutions each. I chose them after a lot of listening and measurement comparison and one of the comparisons was with the corresponding Aesthetix Signature units which are a two-box solution. I also observed the design process for the Wavestream units, participated in some of it to a very minor degree and have been an alpha and beta tester for them (which is the only way I can afford to play at this level). So you are right that a one-box solution can be comparable to a two-box solution at the highest level but are wrong that no experienced listeners have compared the two.

Based on my (limited) experience, the two-box (or four-box like the Lamm) solution is better in the pure engineering sense. The one-box solution makes for design and production expenses which are not obvious unless you actually try to do it. The Wavestream is proof that a high-performing, one-box solution can be done but it is not easy. They set as a design constraint that their units would be one-box and took on the design, production and expense issues that came with that decision.

Best, John

Dear John: I'm not a tube lover but I know and I like your Wavestream phono stage and as you say this is a very good example on the " one box " design subject.

Other than marketing and myths a multi-box solution IMHO is more easy to design and has a higher customer credibility factor than one box.
So the real problem with is in one side almost educational: customer non-know how about. Inside the AHEE all we already receive an " education " ( each one day ) that told us that multi-boxes are the only and right way to go: we almost have a tattoo on this ( like in many other subjects. ), we receive this kind of education over many years so will be a titanic and almost impossible task that one designer/manufacturer can have " massive " success with one box marketing approach.

In the other side and like you point out it is not easy the one box design to achieve top quality performance.
Through my experiences on audio design I learn other additional subjects on electronic design and in specific to PS stages: the audio electronic power supply design is totally a different area to input/output and interstages electronic designs, the PS design require different and specific designer skills and knowledge.
For you can really can design and build a first rate/state of the art audio items ( amps, preamps an the like ) you need to be expert in audio circuit design and in PS designs especially if you are in the SS units design, with tubes in many ways is a lot more easy but you need to be an expert too.

I have to say that there are not many first rate PS designers and due to this fact along marketing we have " overkill " PS designs, DC/battery PS designs, multi-boxes designs and the like.

The PS design is a critical part on any audio electronic item with a high ( more that we can think ) weight in the overall quality performance of that audio item, suffice is to say that the PS design can make and makes: The Difference in an audio item for the best or wrong/bad.

Almost all we customer think that a battery PS is better than an AC one. This can be true if the AC PS design is a poor one but if you have the right and precise knowledge to design a state of the art AC PS then that statement is far from be true.
Many audio item manufacturers support battery PS over AC ones and IMHO there are only two reasons for that: marketing ( AHEE. ) and/or low knowledge on AC PS state the art designs.
IMHO there is no single technical advantage in a battery PS against a well designed AC one but like I say before: this is an educational customer issue promoted by the AHEE through the years. Btw, IMHO only alkaline batteries can do justice to battery DC PS.

The AHEE put ( on purpose or not. ) a " heavy " bandage in our " eyes " this IMHO makes that almost always we really buy audio items in a " blind " way.

Of course that there are many customers that like to " learn " thinking and testing/trying many audio subjects/alternatives out of the AHEE and decide along those " new " audio experiences.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[The Smokester]

Raul, The Wavestream "single-box" solution could also be termed a "big-box" solution. There is a lot of empty space inside in order to get the standoff between the power supply and the small-signal amplification stage. Wavestream struggled with this size trade-off (and the layout inside) and in the end designed and build their own enclosure since no supplier made one to fit their specification...An example of a non-obvious extra cost. It has to be big enough to provide the standoff and small enough to fit into a standard rack and there were at least two iterations on this if I remember.

There are lots of ways to skin the cat. I think that the Wavestream is a very elegant solution in its simplicity and superb in its performance. I have had many hi-zoot phonoamps in my system (BAT, CJ, Nagra, PhD, Aesthetix...) and so far the Wavestream is by far the one that floats my boat the highest.

 

[cjfrbw]

It seems that high end designers wind up in their later iterations spending more and more attention to their power supply topologies. The mystery remains as to how and why the power supply contributes so much to the sound quality, but it does.
The Lamm ML3's are interesting because they go back to tube rectified power supply for that SMOOOOTH response.
John's Wavelength preamps have solid state power supplies, but the Amplifier itself has an input stage that uses a tube rectifier.
John has been holding out on BAAS, I heard his system a week ago, one of the best imaging systems I have ever heard with the Dunlavey speakers and Wavelength electronics. I think the imaging of the Dunlavey/Wavelenth system can go toe to heel with the Magico I heard in Berkeley a couple of months ago. The Wavelength electronics are really good.
I think it makes sense to place a power supply in a different chassis, but is not really necessary except that the power supplies tend to be designed as separate components anyway in their own right by most high end designers.

 

[MylesBAstor]

It seems that high end designers wind up in their later iterations spending more and more attention to their power supply topologies. The mystery remains as to how and why the power supply contributes so much to the sound quality, but it does.
The Lamm ML3's are interesting because they go back to tube rectified power supply for that SMOOOOTH response.
John's Wavelength preamps have solid state power supplies, but the Amplifier itself has an input stage that uses a tube rectifier.
John has been holding out on BAAS, I heard his system a week ago, one of the best imaging systems I have ever heard with the Dunlavey speakers and Wavelength electronics. I think the imaging of the Dunlavey/Wavelenth system can go toe to heel with the Magico I heard in Berkeley a couple of months ago. The Wavelength electronics are really good.
I think it makes sense to place a power supply in a different chassis, but is not really necessary except that the power supplies tend to be designed as separate components anyway in their own right by most high end designers.

I might also add that separate power supplies might also prove useful in a situation such as a phono section.

 

[The Smokester]

It seems that high end designers wind up in their later iterations spending more and more attention to their power supply topologies. The mystery remains as to how and why the power supply contributes so much to the sound quality, but it does.
The Lamm ML3's are interesting because they go back to tube rectified power supply for that SMOOOOTH response.
John's Wavelength preamps have solid state power supplies, but the Amplifier itself has an input stage that uses a tube rectifier.

Carl, Thanks for the kind words. I believe Wavestream spends a lot of time on their power supplies but there is a lot I don't know about them. I have the full schematic only for the power amp, and only partial schematics for the other two units, and it is deliberately so. In the power amp, the power supply is a work of art and also very complex.

I know that the power supplies of the phono- and line-stages are "line stabilized". That is, they are regulated so that the dc supply voltages are independent of the "120V" line coming in.

 

[silviajulieta]

I might also add that separate power supplies might also prove useful in a situation such as a phono section.

Dear MylesBastor: The John's Wavestream one-box unit is a phono stage that as you point out is a critical electronic stage but the knowledge Wavestream level made that performs very good with no apparent degradation due that its PS comes inside and along that delicate phono signal circuits.

IMHO and from a technical level all depend of the designer targets and how he decide to achieve it. If you have the precise knowledge and resources you can design almost any electronic audio item in one box fashion with a top quality performance that can even a multi-box approach. The only and real trade-off could be: marketing and customer credibility.

Steve posted here to my question " that if Vladimir makes that signature line stage in one box for 4K he buy it either ". I respect this answer but I have my own suspicion/doubt about if this hypothetical question/circumstance be a reality where customers have to decide for a one box 4K item against a two-box 15K similar item ( where money is no object. ). Even the customer has to " fight " against the audio item distributor that will push harder on the 15K unit and not on the 4K one. The AHEE is the one that decide for us!

Anyway, tecnically knowledge seems to me the name of the game in the thread subject.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[Gregadd]

Ahem! Raul Vladimirs line stage is a dual mono four box at $42k. From what I could hear worth every penny. A remote controled motorized volume conttrol and a little industrial art would make it just about perfect.