Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
69.65.69.236
In Reply to: RE: PLLXO biamp + passive pre-amp on MMGs: a nice little surprise posted by neolith on August 12, 2014 at 07:49:55
Neo, I must thank you for your attempt to defuse. The comparison to the former inmate, actually begs for an opportunity to clarify things that seem to have been missed. For one, PG never provided much in the way of objective indicators.To his credit, this did not stop some of his contributions from being very useful to inmates. That someone "demanded" from him explanations as to why these worked -- and he often delivered some made-up science instead -- does not diminish the value of the contributions. Human history is full of successful empirical and experimental approaches. Many yielded great benefits that engineering and pure science had to catch up with for explanations much later.
As Davey would say: "Sorry, Mr Edison, your light bulb's physics need to be explained -- and in proper engineering terms -- before we can use that light." LOL! Luckily for Davey, I am not a genius like Mr Edison, or as smart as PG. But, I am not too much of an idiot either, just a little. Plus I have good hearing, much perseverance when it come to pursuing tweaks and honesty. I don't like too fool myself, much less others.
I REPORT based on my perceptions and measurements in a real-world acoustical environment. I did not offer ANY explanations, since I am merely reporting at this stage and I also wanted to be brief. No matter, Davey simply pounced, claiming that I explained the workings of things wrongly. I explained NOTHING. So, in his first reply he took on the "bass" subject as if I had attemped to explain it. That's when the "dissing" began.
Talk about his "straw man argument" phrase, which I just learned about...or red herring, as I know it! His true aim was the PLLXO/Passive-pre combo itself...a practical impossibility to him, it seems.
I did make clear WHO this original posting was for: "heavy tweakers and the adventuresome at heart", did I not? I further added that it works only in some cases. It does take some talent along with the opportunity, which further reduces the amount of people who would use it. A little teamwork can go a long ways. On this I am known to provide help and additional details when asked.
The real issue is that Davey felt compelled to squash my unveiling of a working combination (PLLXO/Passive-pre) which he has trashed in the past. Asking me was "out of the question", LOL! Dumb me, expecting him to do so.
In any event, we agree on something. The PLLXO/Passive-pre combo may not be the wisest thing to do in most cases. Like I stated originally, it may be only work for some "heavy tweakers and the adventuresome at heart".
Finally, at this moment, PG must be happy as hell. Imagine, two of his harshest critics are now at odds with each other! I think we would be better off if he came back after all...Davey must be missing him that badly, LOL! Hmmm, Neo...was that strategic thinking on your part, bringing him up? :-))
Edits: 08/27/14Follow Ups:
Back to some pesky facts regarding PLLXO's and passive preamps.
I've posted regarding PLLXO's for many years on this forum and nearly always I've qualified my statements with something like...."PLLXO's variables must be understood.....", "you can't easily transfer to a different power amp combination......", "source resistance must be low.....", or various other qualifiers along those lines. That doesn't mean they won't work.
If you can find a post by me where I declared a "PLLXO/Passive-pre combo a practical impossibility," I'd like to see it.
For you to intimate that I'm not a fan of PLLXO's is simply silly. I lost count, but I think there are probably about fifty Maggies users out there who have successfully bi-amped their systems with a PLLXO I optimized for them.
Dave.
Wow, I may have missed clarifying this! I have never intentionally said that you are against the PLLXO itself (alone). If I even implied it by omission, I apologize. Yes, I can see that some inmates may not realize that we are disagreeing ONLY about the combination of a PLLXO plus a Passive Pre-amplifier.
Folks, for the record, we have both been always in agreement that a PLLXO (by itself) has it's well-earned placed as a crossover alternative. It is my preferred option whenever it is applicable and Davey has always done a terrific job of explaining its strengths and weaknesses. Thanks to his direct help, several inmates do indeed enjoy uncommon delights from their Maggies.
Ok, let's clean up this mess, please. As for you influence in the past, I am not in the least bitter about it, at all. I made the decision. However, it was your insistence on the sensitivity of PLLXO's which convinced me to stay away from adding a passive preamp long ago.
You really know your stuff. Many of us take it seriously, and for good reasons. I will submit that none of us can be right all the time but you tend to be more reliable than all of us here when it comes to the electronic engineering.
So, I took the passive pre-amp off my priority list years ago. Meanwhile, I installed these devices for friends, who marveled at what their systems did as a result. Yet, I refrained from even trying to fit one at home with the PLLXO biamp. To be sure, had I done it too early, I would have crashed and burned. For a long time I merely walked to the system and hooked my PLLXO directly to the source for the additional sweet delights.
It was not until later, when I had created several PLLXO implementations, that I began to see some opportunities for a passive pre to be added. PLLXO reactivity could be dealt with within an envelope of values; limited, but potentially useful. All my players/sources & DACs now had suitably high outputs. At that stage, I figured that I could make compromises and I made some adjustment for it. It is tricky. It certainly is not for everyone. Yet, when it can work, it is a genuinely worthwhile pursuit...if only for a few cats like me.
Your own opinion on the whole matter of the combination was restated here in this thread. You've made it sound as if it is "practically impossible." But hey, by and large, I am not in disagreement with you at to how challenging it can be. This is stuff that works in a narrow range of opportunities. I was merely lucky that my system could already fit that range. Which really is luck, not smarts. Well, luck and the constant pursuit at experimental level, which helped.
The sweeps I included yesterday show that EQ can stay stable after varying the volume at the passive pre. Yet, as you well know, something's gotta give for this to happen...and it varies from system to system. Because of the PLLXO, no "just add water" recipe can be made unless all componets are the same. However, there is a range of practical equipment combinations, I am beginning to suspect. Identifying these in the next few month may offer more practical choices....if it can even be called "choices".
Post the schematic of your PLLXO and your passive preamp specifications so we can all take a look and analyze.
Dave.
I just got home and saw this after midnight.
You know, even a "please" could have made a difference. Somehow, I don't react well to commands.
Anyway, there will be a time when I will explain my own setup, months from now. It is not a spite. It is part of a larger plan in which the designs that I use can be seen in proper context.
Therefore, I strongly suggest that we stop here for now. This will be my last: Please.
"Proper context." Huh?You've made claims.......I'd like to see the circuit and component values so I can simulate and then discuss.
Send it to me off-line if you like.
Please.
Dave.
Edits: 08/16/14
This lunch break gives me a chance to recollect the improved sweetness of the music that I barely had enough time to enjoy over the weekend. Its aftertaste remains strong in my mind and heart, almost like an amazing dessert after this quick meal.Yes, context. The "gestalt" of my whole setup is now far from any MMG-based system out there. My system is very different partly because my MMGs are different from most. Furthermore, I have ventured well off the beaten path, as well as the beaten formulas. There are ongoing efforts to see which of my tweaks may work with more current MMGs (or even other Maggies) and in other contexts.
As for the combination of the PLLXO and a passive preamp, it will be a new addition to the ongoing refinement effort. I also need to buy one (I used a borrowed one).
You called it a claim, which is fine. In this thread, I already added measurements to back up the claim. Again, it can be done. I don't sell this stuff, it will be free to all. In a few months, things will be presented in their full context at my home. After that, I will be mostly gone from this forum to help folks in other forums with their health issues.
Meanwhile, I crave to listen and enjoy more of my music. The substantial distractions in argumenting can wait.
Edits: 08/18/14 08/18/14
I'm glad you looked up the definition of straw man and red herring. You're employing them like a champ now. :)
My goodness.
Dave.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: