Paul S wrote:

At the same time, I am wondering about what sources you have been using.  I mentioned early on that the Jubilee is polite, and I wonder what the Shelter might sound like with the "softer power", just with respect to a capacity for violence, and likewise I wonder if you might try less buffering in the DAC PS.  Sure, it's easy for me to sit here and wonder, but it sounds like you have an opportunity to use more "raw" sounding sources now?

Paul S wrote:

In any case, I am specifically curious about phono, since this is the acid test.

Paul S wrote:

Sounds too good to be true, Romy.  But it is winter, and I admit I'm still holding my breath.

Romy the Cat wrote:

In the end I feel that the PP2000’s softness/politeness is not a liability but opportunity. I certainly not willing to go back to the softness/politeness lacking type of sound and I would like to make my playback to be able to be deliberately atrocious if I was asked. Let see how it goes… I still not in hurry to do any changes now as I would like to live with the overwhelming softness/politeness for a while and to get use to it…

drdna wrote:

From my own experience, every change that has stayed permanently in my system, at first seems soft and sort of boring. I am inside always a little disappointed when I first hear these changes, because they seems so neutral and unexciting. However, in time I come to appreciate that this is a more revealing path to the Sound. Other changes, the ones which are exciting at first more often become fatiguing with time as I tire of the novelty of the new distortions I am hearing.

It is kind of unbelievable in away: I have for a week the same stable sound. That is a good sign. The less good sign that I need to do something else in order to take sound where I would like it to be.

Without doing anything I like what I am getting, I asked many times of my desire to have the final sparkle in the mid of this PP2000 softness is some kind of audiophile itch. I do not think so and I feel that the performance of my MF channel in context of the “different” electricity shell be revised. The good part is that I might combine the MF revision with my DHT experiments – good timing.

My only concern at this point with going further is the presents on the out of my APS regenerator the “Nervousness Distortions” upon which I commented on previous page. I do not know HOW they are auditable. It is very possible that they are not auditable at all or, that they even improve the sound. I still would like to get a reference result with a clean sinusoid and then to go from there. Also, I do not know if the APS fixes the problems then what sonic consequences the fix will/might have.

For a time being I did drove my MF with different amps in context of the new softness. I have a full-range Milq (from my Insertion channel) that I used with speaker-level filter. I have also tried different S2 drivers, with metal suspended diaphragms. I built the 2A3 kit (took 3 hours) and was trying to drive MF from it. The results were different and mostly in a right direction but to lock anything in my mind I would like to know that the electricity environment is dead-bolted. So, I need the APS people to finalize their results in regard to the “Nervousness Distortions”. Or perhaps I need to wait when the Avicenna arrives and see what it will do.

I think my movements with MF amps will last another month or so, I am not really in hurry. Whatever it is, is kind of very interesting - it is good but with “no transient reserve”, if you know what I mean. I king of accustom that my MF channel has a lot of spare transient capacity that it is not necessary use but has in disposal if necessary - it does not work now this way. Also, the “Water Drop” tweeter acts also “different”, it is not worth but butter and “different” – I can’t figure out how at this point. I certainly need to live with it longer. The next week I will be taking with APS folks about the “Nervousness Distortions”, let see how it will go….

Denis,

In the PP 1050 I had better result what I use extra ferrites in deferential modes, or putting ferrites in each individual wire. I never had problem with PP 1050’s dynamics until I begin to add capacitance to the PP’s output over 3-4uF. I also had no PP sound additions in the mids. With all my blame to PP 1050; sound I do not think that I had any issues with it. The Super Texture of the 1050 broke the mids apart a bit but it was about it. What problem are you experiencing? Can you post the wave your PP outputs?

Romy the Cat wrote:

I asked many times of my desire to have the final sparkle in the mid of this PP2000 softness is some kind of audiophile itch. I do not think so and I feel that the performance of my MF channel in context of the “different” electricity shell be revised. For a time being I did drove my MF with different amps in context of the new softness. I have a full-range Milq (from my Insertion channel) that I used with speaker-level filter. I have also tried different S2 drivers, with metal suspended diaphragms. I built the 2A3 kit (took 3 hours) and was trying to drive MF from it.

drdna wrote:

So what are the effects of good electricity of the PP2000? It may be a good idea to look at the frequency response and harmonic distortion of the system to see if filters in the Macondo speaker system may need to be adjusted now for example. At any rate I would first examine the results of the PP2000 more closely before making any more asymmetric changes to the speakers or DSET amplifiers.

There are no low-path filters in Milq-Macondo’s upper frequency drivers. The MF driver runs high-passed, wide open atop. I even thought to put temporarily an extra resonator at + 2daB 10K to see help, the old metal-suspension of S2 drivers dose the same. What I feel is that I would be OK of I get 1.5 more transformer ratio and 1dB more gain with the new ratio. This would male me to have 3-4dB more from the MF tube, but I have no more gain in there. This leads to two-stage solution (if I am willing to stay with triodes). However, if I end up with two-stages in MF then why do not trey the DTH in the second stage?

I would agree that there is a rational to examine the results of the PP2000 more closely before making any more asymmetric changes to the speakers or DSET amplifiers but I do not make any changes to the speakers or DSET amplifiers. The speakers are the same and the only changes I make is to the separate SET amps where I might model the changes. I am not going to open the Milq and to make any change until I have a confidence that the things are all settled from all perspectives. At this point I will have two amps for my MF channel – the default Milq and the experimental with San-Audio DHT.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Denis, In the PP 1050 I had better result what I use extra ferrites in deferential modes, or putting ferrites in each individual wire. I never had problem with PP 1050’s dynamics until I begin to add capacitance to the PP’s output over 3-4uF. I also had no PP sound additions in the mids. With all my blame to PP 1050; sound I do not think that I had any issues with it. The Super Texture of the 1050 broke the mids apart a bit but it was about it. What problem are you experiencing? Can you post the wave your PP outputs? The Cat

Denis,

There are objective characters of electric wave and deviation from it sinusoid profile impact sound. Leaving the HF noise aside I would say that there are also some unknown characters of electricity that impact sound. What you report shell not take peace and it is doe then in order to think about any exoreic reason the normal objective reasons shell be filtered out. The PurePower devise runs a global feedback in order to make the D-amp operate. This makes the characters of load being a direct derivative of the regenerator operation. The type of the PS of your load might or might not to distort the operation of PurePower. If you are willing to debug your problem then you can’t make it blindly – you need to have an objective data about the operation of your unit. Found a friend what has a scope and know how to operate it and it will be a good help to you. What you report is not something that I experienced. The PP1050 did not channel my “concentration on mids” and did not change frequency response at all. Also, I did not see that it “dynamics (both micro and macro) were suffered” when the PP1050 drove amps with CRC power suppliers. Did you try to play with AC polarity? If you did not then you shell as it is huge factor with PurePower.

Romy the Cat wrote:

With the late success in my battle with electricity I was slowly reviewing some of my things. What I detected that in context of good electricity I can set up my Injection Channel much more aggressive, let seat 2-3dB more than I did before (not it is at minus 12dB).

Actually, Adrian, I think you took it out of context. I the quote above I was talking about the Injection Channel and I did not talk about the whole system equalization. I just said that the Injection Channel might be driver harder. Do not forget that in the Injection Channel I had a Red’s compression tweeter that has less dirt with better electricity. However the “colorful dirt” is something that I USE from Injection Channel, so it is not surprise that now I might add a few dB more from the Injection.

Regarding the “curve equalization”… hm, I do not know yet. First of all I feel that PP2000 is slightly “released” some HF. Second, I have already EQ the system by adding 6dB on tweeter and running MF from 25-30mA on plate to 38-40mA on plate. It is a strange feeling as it is not as much about a shortage of HF but rather a shortage of excessive HF to which we most unfortunately are accustomed in audio. I was listing today the RR orchestral CD with their full extended range and I felt absolutely no shortage of anything. Anyhow, it might a very mild bust of MF would be interesting but I would do it only very atop of MF diver. Still, I did not make any conclusions about it.

Romy the Cat wrote:

First of all I feel that PP2000 is slightly “released” some HF.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Simply beyond any criticism. The Purepower bass was something that sold me on the very first unit in June 2007. The very first Purepower 1050 had the same type of bass. What kind bass? Well, if juts did not “improve” it and did not modified it in respect to what it is once-twice per year when electricity is good. It is just what it is without any “help”. I have to note that I never see any power devise that does not ruin bass. Furthermore the PP2000 did something that made me to say “holly shit” and made me willing to kiss the damn regenerator. Two years back when I finalized the 6-ch Macondo and Melquiades interaction I use one of my “secret” method of slowing down midbass. I discovered some effects during my experiment with delay channels and I implemented some foundlings, I do not want to go into details about it now. Anyhow, the things were done “properly” according to the “concept”, the results were fine (my rook sound “larger” then what it shell be) but honestly I expected more from the “concept”. I still felt that my midbass it too fast but some other aspects did not allow to slow it down, it is complicated. So, driving the system from PP2000 I suddenly recognized that my midbass has slow down, exactly at the level how it meant to be in accordance with the things that were done to Macondo/Melquiades. It was like a freaking déjà vu feeling! So, presumably the AC nose or what it is made my midbass to collapse sharper…

I figured out that my site turned out to be a quite good source for “PurePower’s Survival Guide”. It would be nice to abstract the PurePower into a separate subject but it is too much intervened with the thread of “Bad Electricity” that I decided to keep it as is. Anyone, I hope the people who cluelessy use PurePower and who strive for better results will find this post.

Last night I listening the 6 sides of my “Die Walkure“ I caught myself that all HF went back and the sound was not HF challenged, furthermore I even rolled off 2 db on my tweeters. The record I played were un-played, tulips, first pressings but the recording was not to my liking. The orchestra did not do what I would like it and the sound was what other my call the typical DG sounds. I cared less as I was listing for different thing…

Somewhere in the mid of the second act, I comfortably posturing on my couch, clicked a few DB mode right along with Wagner turned loud and it suddenly came to me that something was wrong. The brass section of Berlin Philharmonic during upsurge becomes almost painful. That was the effect that I thought the PP2000 cured and soothe that I did not experienced for 10 days. That puzzled me. I looked careful at the sound that I was getting and I did recognized a lot of sighs of bad electricity at HF. This type of sound I was attributed to the given records and had no thought about electricity as my entire systems was running from PP2000. I put the “Die Walkure“ aside and played the recordings that I knew. It was obvious that SOME aspects of bad electricity came back: excessive HF, improper integration between woodwind and strings, “noisy” sound of woodwinds, flatten imaging of upper frequency region, absents of sophistication in horizontal propagation of portrayed sonic events, few more and too long to mention them all. What pissed me is that the whole system was running from PP2000 and I changed nothing.

Since I introduced the PP2000 I literary took my playback apart as all power cord and power suppliers needed to be rerouted. Yesterday morning I cleaned up my room and put all right power cords in this final location, finishing the experiments with power lines, PP2000 and taking the PP2000 box to the storage. I however did not change anything in the connection and my playback still was ALL running from PP2000, all 19 receptacles. I figured that ether the PP2000 got broken, of the power line begin to have something that PP2000 was not able to decouple handle. It made me very disappointed as one of the greatest accomplishments of the PP2000 was (I thought) that I would never will think about instability of electric quality anymore. Well, the result I was getting made me very sad.

I was trying mentally to return to the glory time of the PP2000 (a few days back) and I asked myself what I did wrong. I know that the morons who sell $5000 power cords in context of bad electricity would say that I used wrong power cords to lay doe the final setup but it was not the case. First I know my power cords and second the type of the problem that I faced was very much beyond what power cords might be even theoretically to be responsible for. I decided to debug even it was very late but I might not have time this week and I really did not want to end the year with the knowledge that  my problem with electricity is still pending.

Well, it was painful, ugly and I have found the problem near 4AM… I for a long time did not go to bad so “satisfied”. It turned out that that problem was not with PP2000 but was a very minute and completely neglected by me change I made that I even forget to acknowledge. It however had a profound effect and screw up all sound.

So, what I did. I have Dorrough –made, high precision 1/4dB modulation meters on right and left channels. They are digital and I run them for years to calibrate the output of each channels, the people who run multiamping with tubes would understand now indispensable this tool is… and I run 12 channel of active amplification. They are 2Meg input impedance and have absolutely no impact to sound, I usually keep them unplugged of plagued in uppers bass channel. I did not use them for the last two weeks but since I put all system back I plugged them. My PP2000 sits in the closet on the left and the Dorrough meter for my right amps had no length of the cord to go the and I figured that it would not be too much hard to plug it in power lines. After all it has no ground connection, uses only hot and neutral, has huge input impedance for signal and affects nothing. Well, good luck with this thinking as unplugging the Dorrough meter from the power lines and plugging it to the PP2000 regenerator eliminated all problems that I describe above.

So, what is the concussion? In the following article:

http://www.romythecat.com/GetPost.aspx?PostID=9250

I accented how critical to maintain in the components connected to PP2000 an absence of any other grounds. However, the story with Dorrough meter sudsiest that it is not only the alien grounds but the alien neutrals those screw up sound of equipment driven from PP2000.  So, if the power line has .630V between ground and neutral, the PP2000 sits on the same ground but the PP2000 outputs 1.120V between ground and neutral then those neutrals are absolutely not compatible, otherwise you might be paying the sonic toll as I did. Connecting Dorrough meter into neutral with different reference to ground had horrible impact to sound, much worth then I even might expects. Whatever the reason is but it shell be considered, knows and used as the playback connected to PP2000 looks like hipper sensitive to those sort of things.

DSH wrote:

Thanks Romy. On the AC polarity do you mean playing with the player/amp polarity or with the PP one? I always try to have all devices to be in phase. Denis

As I said before, in many if not all instances the provisions for “bad electricity” are deeply entrenched into the design of our playbacks. A few days back I took advantages of some new possibilities that PP2000 offered and made some changes in playback. It is trully a new level of game all together. For instance I always was very proud with the level of integration of Macondo drivers.  It is 8 feet tall installation but it performs integration-wise more interesting and more complied then a single-driver and it might do from insulting distance of 6.2feet. With the PP2000 I went even more offensive and I moved my couch for one foot closer and toe-off the speakers a bit. The result is very impressive. The whole concept of integration I juts evaporated and Macondo not throw imaging as one completely integrated sound field where the relationship between right-left, up-down, closer-further are presented in very different and completely other  format.  I know for ordinary reader who never was in my room is sound ridicules that 6-way 8 feet tall playback might be properly integrated from 5.2feetand not just “properly integrated” but able to resolve advance tasks of integration. I witnessed again and witnessed the people who never hear HOW Macondo sound sit in my couch with a sense of doubt and apology to me as the speakers from the listening position even looks like they are “not together”. The doubts usually stop when Macondo begins to play. That what was before. Now in addition to integration came a new sense of space texture.  Do you remember I for years was pitching a concept of imaging without soundstage? Well, for 99% of audio people out there it was not understood idea BUT there is something more behind even the “imaging without soundstage”. I mentioned that “next level” before but it did not have a momentum as it was VERY difical to get, I called it “flexible soundstage with space vectors”….

Since now Macondo is very comfortably and absolutely predictable operates at this new level of “flexible soundstage with space vectors” I think I will be talking about it in future.

After a few hours of conversation with Dima and discussing the Avicenna’s details I put the preorder transformers together and light up the Regenerator.  I was running it to different modes testing the operation and measuring the results in bypass, buffered and stabilization mode. I used different load from 1kw cooking pan to 1kW of my playback load, different loads, LC, CRC and any imaginable supplies. Well, this thing is made truly insulting it is even imposable to publish the sinusoid as in all modes with Avicenna engaged it outputs an absolutely perfect sinusoid with any load – there is nothing to see in the scope as it looks like came right from a reference generator. Dima said that at 500W load it has less than 0.1% distortion, so it is no surprise that I do not see anything in the scope. I will activate tomorrow the Avicenna distortion measurements functionalities and will be able to see them in real time.

So, I have a looks like perfectly operating, pure analog, unlimited power, over 85% efficient,  DC disabled,  regenerator with output impedance of a few milliohm and that out an absolutely perfect wave without any regard to load. Now I need to do what it is all about – to found out how it will sound. I did not listen Avicenna yet and it will be the task for my weekend. I am very glad what it does so far operational. The design looks like very very good, Avicenna shell be made commercially to show off how commercial equipment might be made with operational meticulousness of precision instruments.

I did detect something not good. Take a look.

This is Avicenna in buffering mode, driving 1340W. As you can see at the very top of wave there is a small “nervousness”. Not the same type that APS had but it is there. It stats approximately at 1070W, regardless of power factor of load. What impact it has to sound I do not knew yet, not to mention that I do not have amps that suck 12A