You are here

Log in or register to post comments
CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Point-Point is BETTER?

Hmmm, don't ya think things have improved since the 50's? Does some think this "sounds" better? Huh? http://i14.ebayimg.com/05/i/000/a4/8e/0a9e_12.JPG

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?


Quote:
Hmmm, don't ya think things have improved since the 50's?

Somethings have and somethings haven't. Most tube amplifiers still run in UltraLinear operation, a rather brilliant idea from the '50's. I know your opinion of tube amplifiers, and that is not the issue here, dup, so don't repeat your mania in those affairs.

You ask me to look at a picture and tell you whether something sounds good? How is that possible, dup? The amplifier in question certainly has shorter signal paths than an equivalent printed circuit board product would have. Are short signal paths your enemy also, dup? Do you not understand their advantage?

The amp in the picture is full of copper. Rather heavy gauge copper in some areas. How is that not better than an amp full of "foil" traces? Foil, dup! Not copper, not heavy gauge. Foil! What is that foil made of? What metals are in that foil in your amplfiier and speakers, dup? You've never answered that question. Until you do, let's not get rolling on something else you can't understand.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Circuit boards have the advantage of consistency from board to board. If the circuit is well designed physically, a printed circuit board will be the same each time. They are also cheap to produce, which is why they are used in mass production.

However, circuit boards have a high dielectric constant. This is harmful to analog signals. Another problem - that Jan already mentioned - is that large copper fill areas (ground planes or sinks) are often used to complete the circuits between the active elements on the board. These inject noise into the circuit as the power delivery paths are commonly shared with signal return paths. This can be avoided on a printed board, but this costs more money and takes a lot care - something that is often lacking in circit board design. Another issue is that it doesn't take much vibration to crack a circuit trace or a solder joint on a circuit board.

PtP often sounds better than a board circuit. With PtP the leads of individual components connect directly to the circuit nodes, resulting in much shorter signal paths - a key component in accurate, low noise circuits. PtPt also allows many components to be connected in very little space as there are three dimensions to work in, not just the two dimensions of a circuit board. In PtP circuits there are no common ground planes; that is, only one source and one sink are interconnected, keeping noise low.

PtP increases reliability and if soemthing should go wrong the unit can always be fixed by replacing the individual component that has failed. With a circuit board design the board must be replaced. This is generally easy to accomplish but only if another board is available. PtP circuits can also be easily upgraded or refurbished over time as heat takes its toll on components. With a printed circuit you are generally stuck with the older compromised components on the board and it is difficult to replace the active components with newer or better pieces.

There are many old techniques and concepts that are better than their modern equivalent. Consider hand-made violins, hand crafted food, the shave of a single edge razor in the hands of master barber, the patina of hand-rubbed marble sculpture, real musicians playing acoustic instruments live. All of these are more expensive and labor intensive than their modern counterparts - and each is vastly superior.

The best practice is to incorporate those new techniques, materials and components which are superior, while retaining the best of the old.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Terrific post, Elk.

dup, have you ever seen a printed circuit board after it's been repaired when the foil lifts from excessive heat and clumsy hands during a repair? Not a pretty sight and not one that's going to be good for sound quality. Big ol' boogery glob of tin and lead solder hanging on there!

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?

This is very good modern PtP wiring; http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/primaluna/primaluna.html

While this is excellent PtP IMO; http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/genesis/m60.html

These are production amps. The only thing I've seen better is a one off, hand wired MC240.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?

The ckt foil isn't carrying high current loads. Esssh. MAter o' fact teh mfg of these pre amps specifically calls out the DESIGN of teh foil trace ground plane, and improved noise reduction..... You don't seem to understand basic electrical wiring, you use teh size conductor for teh current being suppiled. since you seem to think ckt boards are bad, how on earth do high speed computer ckts functions on those highy congested stuffed ckt boards....can you imagine a point-point wired SACD palyer....holy moly. since those poor sounding IC's that you don't like should be separate componetns, the SACD player would be the size of teh room it's in, IF you could have componets that are fast enough like teh chips are for processing DSD data....vacuum tubes, ain't gonna do it, is it? A well made amp uses the items to do the particulars of teh ckts....IC's that do teh job are used, power MOSFETS for high current stuff, signal transistors for low level signal on teh drier boards, along with some IC's on my amps, pre amps. Actually my pre amps are hybrid, and so are the phase inverters to run teh power amps in mono..Amps are all SS Mosfets, not your father's MOSFETS but MODERN improved higher speed, more linear versions, teh old Hitachis are removed and Exicons are in 12 of em actually in each amp...lotsa current available from teh supperbly designed heatsink. Tubes in teh preamp and SS componets tubes are used for what tubes do best, SS for what it does best in teh pre amps, that's called elecrical design, not just kluging stuff together, and calling it something...all point -point wire is needlessy expensive, waste of space etc. Of course there are WIRES in teh amp from high current devices like the transformer, output stage to teh speaker connectors, ckt board is mounted to each side of teh heatsink, with WIRES conencting to outside stuff, driver board is handling small signals, it's on a CKT BOARD, it would be retarded to have it point-point....dumb dumb dumb. Do you still use a rotary phone? Black and white tv? They had lotsa point-point wiring, yupper those old DuMonts sure where great wheren't they? Compared to thee horrible HDTV flat screen with all them IC's and CKT BOARDS!!!.....Welcome to the 20th century, now that it's the 21st!!!!!
Funny stuff, keep amusing me....if you only knew. Last piece of equipment I worked on teh other day, had all kinds of ckt boards!!! High speed ckts, and WIRES between them, somehow this equipment has been reduced in size, and costs, and works better than the stuff from 20 years ago, cus of IC's and ckt boards.....and when i work on a ckt board, I don't lift foil traces, it's called knowing how to solder....what a concept. What pre amp do you use what speakers?

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Modern musical instruments are much better now than the older hand made stuff, which had lotsa variations, cus' Fender, Gibson use CNC wood working equipment, which is controlled by CKT boards, the cuts are more precise, fit and finish better. They hold tune better due to the much more prescise wood working, modern IS better. They have reissues that are meant to mimic the older Les Pauls, and they are actually better. They make them looked aged, on some versions, but they fit better, using MODERN wood working computer controlled equipment...yupper, sure your 1962 Chevy Impala is a real gem!!! Compared to a modern computer assembled vehicle...21st century, join it!!!! Let's see those point-point DSD recorders fill a room, or even function with leads to big for teh high speed DSD data......just cus' it's OLD, doesn't mean it's better, it usually ain't. It's just that, OLD. Rotary phones, don't you wanna go back to em, more point-point wire in them than a cell phone...with them evil IC's and ckt board...

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

This is a somewhat controversial subject, but PC boards can actually be better than Ptp if done right. I do agree that others use poor techniques and problems do result.

Pc boards can have these advantages.

Gets rid of wires and solder connections by connecting leads, even multiple leads directly together. This reduces multiple wires and solder connections.

Even the low resistance copper bussbar grounds cause feedback problems that can affect sound.

Consistency from unit to unit can be much better with pc boards.

Capacitance from parts to ground can be much much lower, resulting in higher frequency response.

Place the hot parts from the board, use the natural lead length for less heat transfer to the connection. I have not had one problem with heat from small signal tubes affecting boards.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?

dup, what in the world does it take for you to say, "Gee, I see your point"?

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

I'd be a bit careful about siding with dup. Once he finds out you use dual mono volume pots, you'll be in for it!

The point here isn't that one is better than the other in virtually anything. The thread exists because dup took a reference I made to PtP wiring being desirable and distorted it to try proving everyone other than dup is nuts. I certainly never advocated a PtP wring scheme as he portrayed at the top of the thread.

As Elk suggests, and the PrimaLuna and Genesis amps show, both technologies have their place and can exist side by side when common sense is applied. Of course, common sense is not what fuels dup's posts.

I've seen your amps written up. Since you've responded to this thread, I have a few questions.


Quote:
Gets rid of wires and solder connections by connecting leads, even multiple leads directly together.

Removing solder from a connection is, I think, a great idea. We are no longer talking about typical printed circuits, however, as these must be hand assembled. Right? But this route you've described seems as if it would be affected by vibration and oxidation. I notice you use very small transformers in your unit. Lower vibration? How does a no-solder connection fare over time? How does a no-solder component get repaired? It would seem once you've broken the original connection, it can never go back the same way. If it does, this must not be a tech's favorite way to do service.


Quote:
Even the low resistance copper bussbar grounds cause feedback problems that can affect sound.

What you seem to be saying is that all busbars cause problems similar to those found on a printed circuit board. Is this then a real advantage of the printed circuit board? Sounds a bit like spin to me.


Quote:
Capacitance from parts to ground can be much much lower, resulting in higher frequency response.

I'm guessing "can" is an important word here.


Quote:
Place the hot parts from the board, use the natural lead length for less heat transfer to the connection. I have not had one problem with heat from small signal tubes affecting boards.

I'm confused. You don't use tube sockets?

Finally, what are you favorite 6DJ8 tubes for a phono section of an Audible Illusions? I have been using some NOS gold pin Seimens but they have problems with microphonics.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?

I say that when it makes sense...believe me, people do come up with things that make sense, and I do agree. I've been working on some rather expensive, rather intricate equipment since 1977, I do know a thing or two about electrical/electronics. The stuff i work on makes $40,000 prea amps and power amps look like a throw away spare part. You really should learn the basics first, before you try to come up with conclusions about wiring methods and insulation characteristics effecting sound in an audible way. I work on high speed ckts, hV ckts upwards of 60kV...stuff where insulation better be correct or things go up in smoke literally. You have no clue about even teh most simple BASIC concepts of wiring or electrical concepts. you are reading too many creative writing reviews, and coming up with the similar insane conclusions about how a ring lug sounds like or a red covered wire versus a green piece of wire....you really are misguied and really uninformed. I agree with people that understand teh realitys of things, not nonsense. You haven't stated anything that makes any sense...keep trying. You read some creative writers story about some over priced amplifer that is assembled like a 1952 OBSOLET turd, and they claim it sounds better because of the Bakelite insulator they dug out of th scrap pile, and you parrot the nonsense. This is teh 21st century, do you have any idea where modern electronics and electical wiring has advanced too? Get educated and then start getting back into reality. You single speaker driver BS, is utter crap, no one driver can ever reproduce sound anywhere near realistic levels or freq range....your high efficieny low power amp nonsense is more creative writers parroting. Wake up and first learn teh basics of acoustics, electrical design, and electronics. eeessshhh, when will YOU ever say, yeah, you have a point? I'ved work on equipment that used Dekatron tubes for counting ckts..back in teh 70's....they grew into nixie tubes, what a breakthrough, and now 21st century, they don't exist, ya knwo why, they are junk, modern electronics has evolved, what took a panel the size of a bathtub is now done on a ckt board 4" sq. The miracle of IC and non point-point wiring. They work better, faster, less wasted energy, super reliable....when you understand modern elertical design and electronics, you will then see the light....Put away your ideas from 1967....We now have DSD, SD memory cards, ya can record onto stuff non existant even 8 years ago. Your ideas are obsolete and misguided.... Take a course soemwhere on modern electronics, maybe you'll wake up...

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 months 4 weeks ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?


Quote:
However, circuit boards have a high dielectric constant. This is harmful to analog signals.

As opposed to the more prefered low dielectric constant?
We like signal leakage? Isolation is bad? What is the dielectric value between two wires on a terminal strip?


Quote:
Another problem - that Jan already mentioned - is that large copper fill areas (ground planes or sinks) are often used to complete the circuits between the active elements on the board. These inject noise into the circuit as the power delivery paths are commonly shared with signal return paths. This can be avoided on a printed board, but this costs more money and takes a lot care - something that is often lacking in circit board design.

Large PC board ground plans are a good thing as they reduce the resistance value between the common returns minimizing ground loop problems by placing all returns at the same value. They also can be routed to provide shielding to signal traces and reduce noise. Yes, there is both good and bad PC board design.


Quote:
PtP often sounds better than a board circuit.


Do we have a good comparision of two identical circuits except that one has PtP and the other has a PCB?
I bet not. Probably many other variables.


Quote:
With PtP the leads of individual components connect directly to the circuit nodes, resulting in much shorter signal paths - a key component in accurate, low noise circuits. PtPt also allows many components to be connected in very little space as there are three dimensions to work in, not just the two dimensions of a circuit board. In PtP circuits there are no common ground planes; that is, only one source and one sink are interconnected, keeping noise low.

So if short lead lengths are good then those damn surface mount components must be the best. Besides most of their connections being internal, the interconnections are also very short. With the remote mounting of large caps and tubes relative to each other and/or a terminal strip I don't see how PtP can have shorter signal paths than a PCB having most of the components mounted directly to it.
No common ground planes? I thought that the definition of a ground plane is a single common reference point.


Quote:
With a circuit board design the board must be replaced.


Not true at all. Often it is cheaper to replace the board than it is to repare it based on the economics of board cost vs. troubleshooting/labor cost.

Quote:
it is difficult to replace the active components with newer or better pieces.


But we all know that newer or better is a step backwards.

Quote:
There are many old techniques and concepts that are better than their modern equivalent. Consider hand-made violins, hand crafted food, the shave of a single edge razor in the hands of master barber, the patina of hand-rubbed marble sculpture, real musicians playing acoustic instruments live. All of these are more expensive and labor intensive than their modern counterparts - and each is vastly superior.

Yes, many old techniques do still work well, but not becuase of any current known reasons. But then again, we don't know all the questions, so we don't have all the answers.

And DUP of course a PC board can't sound as good as wire because teh thickness to width ratio is wrong. Especially compared to using wire with the magical "golden properties". You really should have known.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Checkout this McIntosh, it would appear to have lotsa ckt boards, and lotsa wires, wouldn't therefore the sound be "confused" sounding to an "audiophlkae", Was this a good preamp? If yes, why, cus' of all that point-point wire mess, or teh large ckt boards, with wires attached to it? And to think in 2007, 2/3's of the stuff in this pre amp is all gone, replaced by more IC's less deadly solder, less wires, less less less...if lotsa wire clutter is good, how does an SACD player possibly sound so good. We need internal antenna, lotsa extra weight and space for more and more 1950's style wiring...cus we all know that old stuff just sounds so much better, doesn't it...now go listen to a nice 78RPM record, of Sal Mineo, or Lousi Armstrong, http://cgi.ebay.com/COMPLETE-RESTORATION...VQQcmdZViewItem

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

And we all know incandescant panel lamps sound BETTER than LED displays, cus' incandesent lamps add that "warmth" associated with better sound, we don't need no stinking cool running long lived LED....they didn't use that when they made my 45 yar old McIntosh.....

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Point-Point is BETTER?

Geez, dup, you must think being King of the Dead Zone is some kind of honor.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?


Quote:
Modern musical instruments are much better now than the older hand made stuff,...

Nonsense. Pre-war Bach trumpets, older violins, early Buffet clarinets, etc. are all prized as having superior workmanship and sound. Similarly, hand-crafted modern instruments remain the pinnacle. Of course, there are aspects that machines do better - like the initial machining of trumpet valves - but the final lapping is done by hand. This is true even of electric guitars; Abyss and Zion come to mind, not to mention the custom shops of the big manufacturers.

And there are many superbly made older cars that are vastly superior to modern mass-produced machines in fit and finish, handling, acceleration, interior design, etc. Vintage Ferrari v. Audio RS4, not even a tough call. Just start by looking at the paint...

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Cyclebrain, I don't know why you made your response to me and the quoted only Elk's post. Fruedian slip? None the less, I do have some comments on your post.


Quote:
Yes, there is both good and bad PC board design.

I believe that's the point everyone here, other than dup, has been making. I would hate to think of a PtP wired home theater receiver or DVD player. There have been multiple, repeated and consistent problems with printed circuit boards in tube power amplifiers.

Has this become an either or situation? One must be bad while the other is always good?


Quote:
PtP often sounds better than a board circuit.

Do we have a good comparision of two identical circuits except that one has PtP and the other has a PCB?
I bet not. Probably many other variables.

You don't think many of those designers who moved away from the lower cost (just toss the entire board full of components rather than do a repair, you know) printed circuit boards in their high end amplifiers (Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, etc.) listened to the effects of the different circuit layouts and assembly techniques before making a decision to go with one or the other? How long have you been in this hobby, Cyclebrain?

Other variables? Yes, tube amps have problems with printed circuits. They are unreliable in certain parts of a tube power amplifier and many tube pre amplifiers. As I told my clients, anything sounds better in your home than it does in my service department. So, yes, I think we can say, printed circuits can affect the sound in a very negative manner if the ciruit stops working.


Quote:
With a circuit board design the board must be replaced.

Not true at all. Often it is cheaper to replace the board than it is to repare it based on the economics of board cost vs. troubleshooting/labor cost.

Cheaper? The troubleshooting costs are often close to the same. You have to find the problem. If the tech knows the problem with a board full of IC components can be traced to the final signal at the output of the board, that can be cheaper. But now we are typically talking about a board full of IC's and surface mount components. You are spinning the broadest sense of why a designer would choose PtP or printed circuits. In a computer or HT component where chips are the only way to build, PtP is not an option. I think we all but one realize that much. But you seem to give no credence to the value of PtP in audio circuits as we see them employed in high end consumer gear. Are you being willfully blind or willfully ignorant?


Quote:
So if short lead lengths are good then those damn surface mount components must be the best.

It would appear so. In class T amplifiers, surface mounts do tend to sound better due, it seems, to the very short signal paths they offer. However, we are now discussing another type of design where PtP of the Tripath chip based amplifiers is not an option. I have, though, had to remove components from a Tripath based board and the foil lifts quite easily. See my comments above regarding foil lifting and the repairs that can happen afterwards. "Can" happen. Not always will. But most of these boards are ruined if a minor mistake is made. I've worked with seasoned techs who have cursed printed circuit boards. And the repair technique you advocate, replacing the entire board, has led us to many throw away components. It's cheaper to buy new than to repair printed circuits. Now, that's progress!


Quote:
it is difficult to replace the active components with newer or better pieces.

But we all know that newer or better is a step backwards.

Now you are sounding very much like dup. Attack the other side without reason or logic. Congratulations! You've turned a corner in your posting, cylcebrain.


Quote:
And DUP of course a PC board can't sound as good as wire because teh thickness to width ratio is wrong.

Spelling like dup too! You are both still ignoring the fact that PtP can have a more appropriately sized gauge throughout the signal path for the current that dup says requires "lots of copper". Since dup loves his 10 gauge copper cables, when was the last time you saw a printed ciruit trace the equivalent of a 10 A.W.G. cable? How cheap would that be? What would be the advantage of a printed circuit over PtP in that application?

Thank you for your contribution, Cyclebrain. I only wish it had presented both sides of the issue rather than choosing to ignore those things that do not agree with your chosen position.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
DUP admits tubes are better!


Quote:
Actually my pre amps are hybrid, . . . Tubes in teh preamp and SS componets tubes are used for what tubes do best, . .

With your hatred of tubes I remain exceedingly amused that you choose a hybrid, admitting that tubes are better than SS in some ways. It must be painful for you to acknowledge that there are times that old is better than new.

As I keep pointing out, the best practice is to use the old when it is best; the new, when it is superior. Same with circuit boards and PtP - circuit boards are great for repeatability, and they are cheaper, smaller, and simple to repair. Great for mass produced equipment, computers, telephones, all sorts of things. There are also excellent sounding pieces with only circuit boards. There are many ways to wonderful sound.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

SASAudio, thanks for your post! Great to have another vantage point.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?


Quote:
Yes, many old techniques do still work well, but not becuase of any current known reasons. But then again, we don't know all the questions, so we don't have all the answers.

Cyclebrain, great to have you on board.

I fully agree. We are still learning. There are things we don't understand, things that we can't measure, etc. This is what makes science so fun. Once we know we can decide what old techniques are worth keeping and which should be tossed.

In your opinion, are there any circumstances when PtP is better than circuit board construction? (Other than one-offs and the like).

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

I'm not trying to cut this discussion short but I think we all know why this thread exists. dup is once again trying to prove someone else is stupid and he chose the most outrageous example he could find of PtP wiring. He is taking a comment I made in another thread and attempting to show only he knows what is right when it comes to audio by offering no proof of either side of the issue, only ridicule. Nothing new here.

I don't believe this is the black or white issue dup would like to make it. No more than dup insistence tubes are always bad, as Elk has pointed out. Therefore, is the issue not which is better but which is better in a particular application? Or, as Elk has inquired, " ... are there any circumstances when PtP is better than circuit board construction?" I would answer in the affirmative.

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

No, once again you can't keep your mouth shut and you're looking for support for yet another smear campaign against DUP. Get over it.

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

"I'd be a bit careful about siding with dup. Once he finds out you use dual mono volume pots, you'll be in for it! "

Yikes, I see Jan.

"The point here isn't that one is better than the other in virtually anything. The thread exists because dup took a reference I made to PtP wiring being desirable and distorted it to try proving everyone other than dup is nuts. I certainly never advocated a PtP wring scheme as he portrayed at the top of the thread."

I understand. Dup is a rather 'interesting' character to say the least.

"Removing solder from a connection is, I think, a great idea. We are no longer talking about typical printed circuits, however, as these must be hand assembled. Right?"

Yes Jan, hand assembled but I do not rid of solder connections as you express it. I probably could have been clearer.

My stuff isn't perfect in this regard because of physical limitations, but many times I can connect multiple leads in one solder connection, reducing wires and multiple solder connections.

Which brings up a good point. Typical 'PC boards' require each part to have its own solder connection. I feel it is better to combine connections into one, if possible. I call it "lead to lead" (copyrighted 1996) connecting.

"But this route you've described seems as if it would be affected by vibration and oxidation."

I don't think resistors are vibration prone, but caps can be, so I glue them above the board to hold them firm, yet away from the board.

I guess another plus is that capacitance between foils is also minimized since there isn't that much of it. Leads are already tinned.

"I notice you use very small transformers in your unit. Lower vibration?"

That and since the circuit is class A operation, no huge tranny is needed as the average current is constant. I am one who believes in minimizing potential sonic problems such as using too much core material.

I also wrote an article concerning DC coupling and how deep bass is artificially accentuated. It also affects the midrange. This is much more of a problem in solid state designs because of multiple DC coupled stages. The results are accentuated deep bass with the associated harmonics being reduced in comparison. I use three proprietary methods, looking for discrepancies, when testing for proper bass response. (Contact me if you want to read that article.)

"How does a no-solder connection fare over time? How does a no-solder component get repaired?"

I use solder connections as explained above. Anyway, no problems in 11 years (since my company began) with any solder connection cracking, breaking, becoming intermittent, looking burnt. As you mentioned it is how it is done.

One can design a component to be 'destruction proof'. By that, I mean if a tube fails, say shorts, nothing around it will blow. So the only other problem would be if a part, winding, or a cap failed on its own. Even then, no heat problem.

"What you seem to be saying is that all busbars cause problems similar to those found on a printed circuit board. Is this then a real advantage of the printed circuit board? Sounds a bit like spin to me."

That is an interesting question. It depends on how a bussbar is employed, even in a single stage design. It is also more problematic in multiple stage designs than single stage designs that I have seen.

One of the stages will not 'see' the original source ground perfectly because of interference from the other stage.
The resistance of the ground bussbar, although low, is still enough to cause the signal from one stage to superimpose on the other stage. It is a low level, complex feedback situation involving phase relationships and maybe more.

Let me ask, has anyone had the problem of 'bleedthru' from one source to another? One is listening to one source but hears music from the other source during quiet passages, or when paused.

There is virtually no current flowing from the offending source, since the selector switch was near perfect (I was able to rule it out) and the impedances involved are so high.

Let me jump ahead with my own experience, and state that by simply installing separate 6" wires from each input jack to ground (the ground has to be short for sure.) Puff, the problem completely disappeared, zilch. Previously, only one 6" wire was used to ground all the input jacks.

This is just a simple example, but I think also a revealing example of how touchy an audio design can be.

I hope you understand fully why I connect multiple leads and then solder them. This keeps any resistance between leads to a minimum.

I hope this explains things Jan.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

Priemier guitars magazine..speaking of old versus new. Old Fender during teh CBS years, gaps, poor fit and finish, today's are perfected because of computer controlled assy. The custom shops at gibson also use modern stuff, they make em better than they ever did....your nostaglia trip is pure fantasy. Yeah those old cars sure are painted better...are you high...cars from teh 50's and 60's and before all started rusting out as soon as they went out of teh factory, todays cars come with better paint better metals, that's why even VW offer 12 year unlimited miles rust warranty etc.....21st century materials are improved over 1930's technology. I doubt if you have seen teh paint on either an RS4 or and old Ferrari....when you do, you will realize you are completly wrong. You go spend big bucks on some antique obsolete car, I'll spend it on a modern non rusting machine...remember, if they where so great they would still be making them the same way...they ain't so they don't. This insane beleif that if it's old somehow it was made better, sure does sell the old junk to people with too much money to piss away. Hey ther's a 1959 Gibson on E-bay for $89,000...what a deal!!! Yeah, those modern CNC machines that do exacting work sure are so much less than hand crafted mistakes and poor fit. That's why today engines go hundrerds of thousands of miles, mine is now at 245,000 and still going fine, cars in teh 50's and 60's would need oil changes every few thousand miles, even then, at 50K miles they where considered worn out. Tires last longer and work better, old is old, obsolete, when you realize material science has improved things, you'll begin to understand, even in audio equipment, things have progressed.....old is not better, it's just that' OLD.
Yeah i miss the carbs on a 1966 Chrysler Newport 383, remeber them? When it was damp out, i had to prop the MECHANICAL choke open to start teh thing always...Todays EFI sure do suck, the cars start in any weather, run forever, like I said 245,000 miles on my VR6 Jetta and still going, and only replaced teh brake rotors onces at 220,000 !!! and only 2 sets of brake pads, cars years ago with them fine drum brakes, every 15,000 miles!!! Cars where way too heavy for teh shit brakes, old is old, not better....21st century, wow, look at all the imporovements, but in audio, TT's sound better? obsolete tube amps with wooly sound and no highs....

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?


Quote:
Let me ask, has anyone had the problem of 'bleedthru' from one source to another? One is listening to one source but hears music from the other source during quiet passages, or when paused.

The last time I experienced this problem was in an old Sylvania receiver from the 1970's. Being a Sylvania receiver from the 1970's the problem stopped when the unit went up in smoke.


Quote:
... by simply installing separate 6" wires from each input jack to ground (the ground has to be short for sure.) Puff, the problem completely disappeared, zilch. Previously, only one 6" wire was used to ground all the input jacks.

How does this differ from star grounding?

Any advice on those 6DJ8's?

SAS Audio
SAS Audio's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: Jun 6 2007 - 6:56am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?

"The last time I experienced this problem was in an old Sylvania receiver from the 1970's. Being a Sylvania receiver from the 1970's the problem stopped when the unit went up in smoke."

Oh boy, smoke. It was just an example of how touchy even a 'simple' wire is in a design.

"How does this differ from star grounding?"

My understanding of star gounding is that of grounding all the leads and wires at one point; while bussbar grounding is connecting leads along a given length of a wire.

With star grounding, extra wires may have to be used to connect parts leads or other points to the star.

"Any advice on those 6DJ8's?'

I tried to be as careful as possible choosing tubes for my designs. Alot is going to depend on the design and parts used, especially coupling capacitors.

I can say is that I tried at least 10 people auditioning my preamp inline and out, and none could tell the difference. I also suggested to some that they would hear a difference, but none could. I also use some custom manufactured coupling caps because I haven't found one currently being produced that was very good. I have not, however, tested them all, especially the more expensive ones.
But then I do not see how the more expensive caps will improve the sound.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!


Quote:
No, once again you can't keep your mouth shut and you're looking for support for yet another smear campaign against DUP.

No? No to what, LS?


Quote:
Get over it.

Get over what, LS? That dup typically (constantly) takes the most ridiculous position on any topic? That a comment stating the value of PtP wiring can be turned into a barage of illogical mumblejumble? That the amp pictured at the top of this thread does not in any way represent the best of PtP wiring? That dup won't acknowledge equally poor circuit board design which is far more prevalent than errors in PtP wiring schemes? That Elk managed to wade through dup's ramblings to find dup's inconsistency? Get over what?

I'm sorry your idol has been knocked down a peg or three in these two threads, LS. But your sounding a wee bit three year oldish. I suggest you should just get over it if you have nothing more to contribute to the thread other than adding more insults and innuendo. dup is doing quite well in that regard by himself.

I hope to see you in the dead zone, LS. Your comments truly belong there.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: Circuit boards v. PtP or when is old better?


Quote:
PI doubt if you have seen teh paint on either an RS4 or and old Ferrari....when you do, you will realize you are completly wrong.


You are too funny!

Look at the paint of any modern mass production car by standing at the rear and looking along the side. You will see orange peel and many other flaws. You will not see these on a hand made car. It's one of the many places the money goes.

You need to get out more. See the world!

You are correct however that current mass produced guitars are better overall than older mass produced guitars.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

LS, are you really trying to portray DUP as victim?

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!


Quote:
LS, are you really trying to portray DUP as victim?

No

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!


Quote:


Quote:
No, once again you can't keep your mouth shut and you're looking for support for yet another smear campaign against DUP.

No? No to what, LS?


Quote:
Get over it.

Get over what, LS? That dup typically (constantly) takes the most ridiculous position on any topic? That a comment stating the value of PtP wiring can be turned into a barage of illogical mumblejumble? That the amp pictured at the top of this thread does not in any way represent the best of PtP wiring? That dup won't acknowledge equally poor circuit board design which is far more prevalent than errors in PtP wiring schemes? That Elk managed to wade through dup's ramblings to find dup's inconsistency? Get over what?

I'm sorry your idol has been knocked down a peg or three in these two threads, LS. But your sounding a wee bit three year oldish. I suggest you should just get over it if you have nothing more to contribute to the thread other than adding more insults and innuendo. dup is doing quite well in that regard by himself.

I hope to see you in the dead zone, LS. Your comments truly belong there.

You know its a reflection on yourself. You can't take DUP. That's DUPs problem? My problem? DUP has no alliance such as the Anti-DUP Yip Yip & The Watermelon Gang Alliance. And yet you would think he unfortunately has control of the board the way you get offended by his very presence. Take yo medicine

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

That made no sense what so ever! You have become even more inane than dup. Quite a feat!

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

LS, there are 25 potentially new visitors looking at this forum at the moment. Can't you please conduct yourself with some degree of dignity in public?

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

Drowning by your own hand must really suck.

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

What are you doing with your hand?!!!

Can't you please conduct yourself with some degree of dignity in public?

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

JA even mentions that newer stuff outdoes older stuff.....hmmmm, Maybe those 45 year old obsolete designs ain't so specail...unless you just like distortion, which you claim is "musical". Yeah, those horrible IC's, that have no distortion to ruin DSD play back. What a concept. Ain't that what Hi Fi is all about. 3% distortion tube amps, selling at absurd prices are a joke. Low damping factor amps, with their uncontrolled wooly bass, boom boom boom, hardly hifi. http://www.stereophile.com/news/072307national/

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

So now you're attacking my amplifiers?! What a joke!

dup, you only wish you had my amplifiers. Give it up, dup, you've lost this one. The pissing contest is over.

If you want to know what people think of your system, place a picture of it on the forum and let people vote as to whether they would stop to pick it up off the side of the road. That should be interesting.

Otherwise, leave my system alone. That's not what the thread is about and your sarcasm is akin to belittling Creek components, an act that got that post sent to the dead zone. Do you just intend to own the dead zone, dup?

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

Stephen, how do you decide when dup has crossed the line?

Lamont Sanford
Lamont Sanford's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 31 2006 - 8:32pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!


Quote:
Stephen, how do you decide when dup has crossed the line?

Another attempt at starting a smear campaign against DUP? Nobody likes a tattle-tale. Here is a novel idea. Put DUP on your ignore list. Me too. DUP hasn't crossed the line just because he doesn't like your amplifiers. "Stephen, DUP is looking at me! Make DUP stop looking at me. DUP is touching me. Make DUP stop touching me...."

Jan Vigne
Jan Vigne's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Mar 18 2006 - 12:57pm
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

LS, did I say you were acting like a three year old? I misjudged upwards of a good dozen or more months.

Here's a plan, LS. You place me on your "ignore" list. I would be honored with that position of distinction. Why do you read my posts in the first place? You don't contribute anything to the discussion when you reply. So why bother? Are you that obssessed with the idea dup can't take care of himself? It's a touching sentiment but just as misguided as any of your other concepts.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

What speakers are you using with this ultra thin wires? Still can't tell me? Those old McIntosh amps are on E-bay for over $2,000. Lotta money for an 80W tube amplifer, with very old components, capacitors that are probably out of spec, reistors that are out of spec....Do you really think a 45 year old amp, in the $2000-S2900 will function, sound, deliver superior music than a modern, 21st century unit....? Think about this, if that was true, don't you think they would still make them that way? Is there any reason even McIntosh ahs now designed newer modern ckts, using modern stable, reliable, ckts? Ya know old is sometimes just OLD, not better? Things have improved over teh years, including McIntosh's. Think back to what they where using as a source material when the McIntosh was new, and current technology!!! todays recordings on SACD/CD even LP is superior ain't it, don't you think this old amp, is not up to the chore of delivering teh full IMPACT, SLAM, lifelike reproduction? Old is old for a reason, otherwise they would still make 1957 chevys too?

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: DUP admits tubes are better!

Never said i don't like your amps, but I don't like your 30 ga wires, maybe the amps fidelity are so limited, you think the further limiting of current, damping factor, is really insignificant? But really, what speakers are you using? Not that i don't like your amps, McIntosh is what got me into this stuff way way way back in teh late 60's early 70's, afer seeing and hearing a custom intall, in teh wall PANLOC stuff..But I do think a clock radio size amp at only 80W in mono is unuseable, in capable of lifelike realism...ain't got no power to do it, and that's the truth. And all tube amps are bloated, lifeless, and poor control over teh drivers. Guitarists use em, for teh tone, teh distortion, in CREATING some great Guitar wailings..they are a sound maker, not reproducer....bloated loose and wooly, guitarists love teh tone, and they add more tone with pedals to further overdrive the tube ckts....I don't listen to Marshall tube amps or Fuchs to reproduce teh spetrum of reproduction..And these guitar amps are CLASS A 30-60W and they can make a guitar sound great, they will not sound great in hi fi... neither will obsolete tube ckts in hi fi amps

  • X