 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.168.80.67
In Reply to: RE: Apparently you've not been reading my posts. posted by morricab on February 24, 2025 at 07:28:04
A simple google search reveals the source of the advertising and the DIYAudio quote you linked are the same thing:
https://www.muzix.eu/us/spd/MG-TPPNG-B100-BLACK/TOPPING-B100-High-End-Desktop-Mono-Amplifier-Unit
Your claim is based on a logical fallacy called a 'false authority'.
You'd want more than a single source wouldn't you??
Look at this a different way. The DIYer's say the heatsinks are small and that is verified by photos of the interior. A class AB amp of this sort of power would have larger heatsinks because it will make some heat even at idle! You may not have much experience with solid state so you may not know.
A class B amp wouldn't need large heatsinks since it will run cool most of the time. People who push this amplifier report that it can get quite warm. That is consistent with class B operation. This is of course simply evidence not proof.
The bottom line is if you want to get to the bottom of this you need to do more research. I noticed Topping is very careful to not mention the class of operation on their website. Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd, since class B has such a bad reputation?? They don't hesitate to mention their class D amps are class D...
Follow Ups:
Pure speculation from your part...
-
only speculation.
And another thing, you can't ignore me on this forum but you have put me on ignore on WBF and yet you spill over conversations from here onto WBF where I can't challenge your statements. I am sure you like wearing the mantle of expert that can't be challenged (yet you still manage to get plenty of people riled up), but there are a number of erroneous things you post that you spill over there (like this Class B amp nonsense you spew).
What are you afraid of Ralph? I have never personally attacked you...just your ideas.
You've done that several times now.
You are saying I'm afraid; that isn't attacking a post, its attacking me.
The reason I put you on ignore on What's Best is quite often your posts about technical issues on that site are incorrect, and you repeat them like propaganda. Is is a Sisyphean task to try to get you to read up?I just didn't feel like it over there, where there's far less technical education on display.
The irony is Ralph is that you, as the amp designer, make a lot of wrong statements, especially about psychoacoustics.
What name did I call you Ralph?
WRT pshychoacoustics; when you change the subject like that and do it in the form of an attack as you did just now, that is a classic verbal abuse tactic. If that was not your intention you might want to make a note of it.
'Amateurish'
'snowflake' off the top of my head.
FWIW the issue here is class B and what I've been saying about it isn't 'nonsense'. Its clear from your responses you've not delved into the topic and the idea that such an amp can be free of artifact is foreign to your way of thinking. Let's start with the link below, which is a patent document about the Wiggins Circlotron, which is the kind of amp EV used to make.
Do a search on 'class B' and you'll see
Still another object of the invention is to provide an
improved amplifier not subject to switching transients
when operated either as class AB or class B.lack of switching artifact
I explained earlier what he's talking about here. Guessing you didn't read it.
There is no measurement in the patent to substantiate this claim. Therefore, it is just a claim and not a fact. Just circuit diagrams, which are interesting and maybe result in a good sounding amp.
The question then is: if this amp was low distortion/no zero crossing and low consumption, why then didn't you build such an amp? This patent was clearly expired when you started building amps?
Why did you make high bias amps, if it was possible to make them as good with low bias?
it makes you look a bit foolish. Its not a whole lot different from attacking the UL patent... Google is your friend; take a look at the link and you'll see it stating clearly its a class B amp; and a comment about 'switching transients eliminated'... sheesh.
why then didn't you build such an amp?
We have been looking into the use of the Wiggins Circlotron for some time. I have a prototype based on EL34s that's on my bench right now.
I simply pointed out the fact that the test data in the patent doesn't reveal whether or not zero crossing distortion is present or not. There is no plot of residual distortion in the patent, therefore, it has to be said that this particular patent claim is not supported by what's actually in the patent. As someone who is on three medical technology patents, I can tell you that such an unsubstantiated claims usually don't fly in a patent application. It is a rather old patent and probably they couldn't produce the correct measurements at that time to prove the claim.
You claim to be able to measure one, so do and publish the results.
There is no verbal abuse in changing the topic. Again, another attempt from you to play some kind of wrong victim. You yourself brought up WBF and my so-called "incorrect" statements. One of those topics of contention was your misunderstanding about what is said in various psychoacoustic publications...particularly about masking and your misunderstanding about how that works.
Just pointing out observed behavior from yourself...look closely at your posts and defensiveness and you will see it if you care to self-reflect.
'FWIW the issue here is class B and what I've been saying about it isn't 'nonsense'. Its clear from your responses you've not delved into the topic and the idea that such an amp can be free of artifact is foreign to your way of thinking. Let's start with the link below, which is a patent document about the Wiggins Circlotron, which is the kind of amp EV used to make.
Do a search on 'class B' and you'll see
Still another object of the invention is to provide an
improved amplifier not subject to switching transients
when operated either as class AB or class B.lack of switching artifact
I explained earlier what he's talking about here. Guessing you didn't read it."
Again, this is a tube amp and we were talking about the Topping TRANSISTOR amp. Tubes and transistors don't behave the same...maybe you even know that?
And again, even with your Class B circlotron tube amp, there is no measured proof that it has no zero crossing distortion. People state all kinds of things that later prove to be exaggeration or false.
There is no verbal abuse in changing the topic.
Any abuse victim understands what is going on when the topic changes as the prior topic was properly addressed.
This isn't about electronics; this is about you needing to be in control.
And again, even with your Class B circlotron tube amp, there is no measured proof that it has no zero crossing distortion.
100% BS. I have the amp in my shop. This is an excellent example of gaslighting. I though you were above this sort of thing. I'm not angry, just disappointed.
Your statements have no basis in reality, Ralph.
"Any abuse victim understands what is going on when the topic changes as the prior topic was properly addressed."
It was never properly addressed, no proof was ever given and now you want to further obfuscate your weak position by playing some sort of lame victim card. Pathetic...
"This isn't about electronics; this is about you needing to be in control."
No, it's about you proving something you claim. Of course you want to change the dialogue away from your lack of ability to demonstrate what you claim.
"100% BS. I have the amp in my shop. This is an excellent example of gaslighting. I though you were above this sort of thing. I'm not angry, just disappointed."
Great! Then it is very easy for you to post the proof. Again, you would rather rail against my challenge rather than just prove it and close the discussion...me thinks thou doth protest too much!
And another thing, you grasp of English and the meanings of words is poor. Go look up gaslighting and you will (if you were open minded) see that I my challenging you on this is not gaslighting. I am making a position statement that you are not able to debunk. Nevermind the fact that were were talking about SS amps and not tube amps in the original discussion. You then threw out a direction change with introducing a rare Class B tube amp that no one knows about and that has no real published measurements.
Your claims you have it on your bench is just that...a claim. Nothing more and nothing less. Show a picture of you with the amp and then the requested measurements...not that it changes my claim about Class B transistor amps.
I did debunk your specious claim that a solid state class B amp cannot operated without a zero crossing artifact. Link below.Your saying I didn't is false.
Great! Then it is very easy for you to post the proof.
Again, and for the 3rd time, what do you need to see as 'proof'? photos??
We both know what you will do when presented with that evidence.
Edits: 03/07/25
Doug Self lists the 8 types of distortion mechanisms when he is discussing his "blameless amplifier"
TABLE 1.
SOURCE ORDER SLOPE ORIGIN
1 Input stage (balanced) 3rd-order 18dB/oct Inherent
Input stage (unbalanced) 2nd-order 12dB/oct Inherent
2 Voltage Amplifier Stage 2nd-order 6dB/oct Inherent
3a Output stage LSN (4 Ohm) 3rd-order 6dB/oct Inherent
3b Output stage crossover Complex 6dB/oct Inherent
3c Output stage switchoff Complex Variable Inherent
4 Non-linear VAS loading Complex Flat Inherent
5 Decouple return in ground Even Flat Topological
6 Rail induction Even 6dB/oct Topological
7 Wrong feedback point Even Flat Topological
8 Capacitor non-linearity Odd 12dB/oct Inherent
The distortions we have been discussing are distortions 3a, 3b and 3c, which he lists as "inherent", meaning they are fundamental to transistor function.
He then states: "In a field like Audio where consensus of any sort is rare, it is widely acknowledged that crossover distortion is the worst problem afflicting Class-B power amplifiers. The pernicious nature of crossover distortion is that it occurs over a small part of the transfer characteristic, and so generates high-order harmonics. Worse still, this range is around the zero-crossing, so it is present at all levels, the THD percentage potentially increasing as output level falls, threatening very poor linearity at low powers."
Furthermore: "To further get the measure of the problem, Fig 23 shows how HF distortion is greatly reduced by increasing the load resistance, providing further confirmation that almost all the 8 Ohm distortion originates as crossover in the output stage."
So, a typical loudspeaker load makes the situation worse and particularly at high frequencies. The lower the impedance, the worse it gets for a Class B amp.
Finally: "This leaves Distortion 3, in its three components, as the only distortion that is in any sense unavoidable, as Class-B stages free from crossover artifacts are so far beyond us."
THat sums it up. He found a way to mostly eliminate all the distortions on his list EXCEPT distortion 3, which are inherent traits of transistors when running Class B.
Doug Self, himself, has declared that avoiding zero crossing distortion in Class B transistor amps is IMPOSSIBLE with current semiconductor technology.
How many times does it have to be repeated before it sinks in? Your saying something without test measurements to show is NOT a fact!!I believe data not your words. So, until you can demonstrate with measurements a Class B amp without zero crossing distortion then it is YOU who is trying to gaslight me, not the other way around. I see you like project what you do onto others... sad...
Edits: 03/07/25
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
