Electronic replacement for a Input transformer?

[Guest]

[quote author="JohnRoberts"]

IMO if you can hear distortion, you can measure it. If you can measure it you can manage (reduce) it.

[/quote]

IMHO, we speak not about absence/presence of distortions, but about what level of which kind of them to measure and weight. Like, if one video monitor produces much less UV and IR distortions than other, it does not mean it is better if it distorts on some short say red and green stripes of a visible specter. You may make that stripes shorter and shorter, so measurements will be better and better, and much better than measurements of another monitor that terribly distorts UV and IR, but people say that it shows brilliant very realistic pictures. However, you still have a right not to believe them because the first one they don't like is much more linear on specters including IR and UV and total distortions measured are very low...

 

[Marik]

[quote author="Wavebourn"]
Better power transfer means less losses that means less amplification factor is needed that means less noises and distortions from active devices.[/quote]

With all due respect, I listened to all recordings you've posted here and never heard one single musical excerpt which would prove that concept.
What is the point and why to bother?

 

[Guest]

[quote author="Marik"][quote author="Wavebourn"]
Better power transfer means less losses that means less amplification factor is needed that means less noises and distortions from active devices.[/quote]

With all due respect, I listened to all recordings you've posted here and never heard one single musical excerpt which would prove that concept.
What is the point and why to bother?[/quote]

With all due respect, you again write like, "Lazha vash Karuzo, Mne Moisha po telefonu nasvistel"...
All recordings I've posted reflect experimenting with recordings of live concerts in random environments such as living rooms and club houses, that is much complex than studio recordings, due to noises, reverberations, presence of speakers... Why to bother, because power amps, speakers, and reflections are recorded, and each and every detail adds to the result, so the point is: requirements to such systems are much stricter than to just ribbons connected to computers in well prepared studios. But experimenting with end results in mind helps a lot to select each and every detail for better reproduction. Doing so, by the way, I've found cellphone speakers as the best possible tweeters for a money: 64 of them in a phased array sound better than much more expensive ribbons.

 

[Marik]

[quote author="Wavebourn"][quote author="Marik"][quote author="Wavebourn"]
Better power transfer means less losses that means less amplification factor is needed that means less noises and distortions from active devices.[/quote]

With all due respect, I listened to all recordings you've posted here and never heard one single musical excerpt which would prove that concept.
What is the point and why to bother?[/quote]

With all due respect, you again write like, "Lazha vash Karuzo, Mne Moisha po telefonu nasvistel"...
[/quote]

:grin: :grin: :grin:
That's a funny one :green:

But no, my point was completely different. IMHO, the quality of recording is 10% of quality of equipment, 10% quality of the room, and 80% skill of recording engineer.

In your recordings I just heard wrong microphone choice for that particular application and it is meaningless to talk about power or any other transfer.

As far as power transfer concerned, we have already talked about it, but once again, the world has abonded it long time ago because of noise, bandwidth, and all associated distortions.

Some 50 years ago they used a 600 ohm standard for the reason of preserving every milliwatt of power because there was only one real power device--transformer. Bulky, expensive, with very high turn ratio (often 600 ohm to 150K grid), they required special techniques to reduce capacitance, leackage, and losses, and were additional sources of distortions and noise as a result of high copper resistance.

Any even slight mismatch often caused a significant change in frequency response.

Ha, try to "preserve the power" of a ribbon microphone and see for yourself what kind of sound you get.

Any microphone manufacturer says that the mic should be loaded with impedance of at least 5 times higher, i.e. in the real life we are in the voltage transfer situation.

 

[Guest]

Marik;
I like the ribbon on your avatar. Do you want to try a transformerless input for it since the world abandoned transformers due to bio-energetic pollutions and UFO interferences? However, a mic design means only few percents, but you have your 80% so can place it properly, and eliminating abandoned transformer you can get some extra percents against competitors...

 

[Marik]

[quote author="Wavebourn"]Marik;
I like the ribbon on your avatar. Do you want to try a transformerless input for it since the world abandoned transformers due to bio-energetic pollutions and UFO interferences? [/quote]

Sure!!! You have promised that solution last year, saying how freaking good it is gonna be and screaming how confident you feel to outdo all those engineers...

Too bad that was all just big mouth blah blah blah

So in fact, what are you trying to say and what is your point?

 

[Guest]

[quote author="Marik"][quote author="Wavebourn"]Marik;
I like the ribbon on your avatar. Do you want to try a transformerless input for it since the world abandoned transformers due to bio-energetic pollutions and UFO interferences? [/quote]

Sure!!! You have promised that solution last year, saying how freaking good it is gonna be and screaming how confident you feel to outdo all those engineers...

Too bad that was all just big mouth blah blah blah

So in fact, what are you trying to say and what is your point?[/quote]

I've posted you a complete schemo (first draft) to try when you've asked how to make a transformerless amp for your ribbon. The idea was in using multiple paralleled transistors before a differential amp, with common feedbacks by voltage and deep-deep servo feedback to minimize a differential input current.
Did you try that?
No.
Big mouse bla-bla-bla only with religious-like content why it should not work. If you are afraid of a small input currents you could use some cheap small transformer with small turn ratio to eliminate that current. Did you try?
No.
Also, I gave you an idea to power the amp from a battery that switches on by a phantom power presence.
Did you try?
No.
Conclusion: you criticize only, but your criticism is of a religious-like nature, you criticize personalities instead of solutions people offer.

So, what's my point?

My point is, I use transformers when I feel like the solution is more optimal than without them. When I need to optimize for other criteria I select different approaches. When people ask me why transformers are used I answer them why. When they ask me why in another case transformers are not used I answer why. In both cases I answer from technical point of view with different optimization criteria. When you've asked me how to eliminate a transformer I gave you a (rough!) solution, but it was good enough to start with.

So, now it is my turn to ask: what is your point? To follow The Bible For Dummies?
Go ahead, but please don't judge others who don't, so nobody will tell you about what you don't like to hear.

 

[Marik]

[quote author="Wavebourn"]

I've posted you a complete schemo (first draft) to try when you've asked how to make a transformerless amp for your ribbon. The idea was in using multiple paralleled transistors before a differential amp, with common feedbacks by voltage and deep-deep servo feedback to minimize a differential input current.
Did you try that?
No.
[/quote]

First, to put things straight, I never asked you how to make transformerless amp for a ribbon. If you remember, I merely stated that on a sane practical level it is impossible and somehow you felt you are up to the task.

Second, may I ask you a serious question?
How do you know I did not try your schematics? Why in the world would you assume and why would you draw conclusions?

FYI, in fact, I did it and breadboarded right away.
Sorry to tell you, but the noise was way too high by any standards.
Apart from the noise problem, I just did not like the way it sounds.

BTW, somehow the input current was not a problem, if it makes you feel better.

[quote author="Wavebourn"]
So, what's my point?

My point is, I use transformers when I feel like the solution is more optimal than without them. When I need to optimize for other criteria I select different approaches. When people ask me why transformers are used I answer them why. When they ask me why in another case transformers are not used I answer why. In both cases I answer from technical point of view with different optimization criteria.[/quote]

I don't see how it is related to the present discussion, specifically one about power transfer, you started yourself, otherwise that's fine.

[quote author="Wavebourn"]
When you've asked me how to eliminate a transformer I gave you a (rough!) solution, but it was good enough to start with.
[/quote]

Sorry, it did not work.

[quote author="Wavebourn"]
So, now it is my turn to ask: what is your point? To follow The Bible For Dummies?
Go ahead, but please don't judge others who don't, so nobody will tell you about what you don't like to hear.[/quote]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

My point (somehow I feel every single time you miss it, jumping to completely unrelated things) is you are advocating for power transfer as the one which means less amplification factor, less noises and distoritions from active devices. I however, never got a satisfactory explanation from you about how power transfer would work in relation to:

1) Signal from capacitor microphone capsule (if you remember, once you just dropped the topic when I said the capsule does not have any power to start with).

2) As I wrote many times before, MOST of microphone manufacturers specify the input impedance of the pre at least 5 times of the output impedance of the microphone (i.e. strictly voltage transfer) to preserve dynamic range and frequency response.

3) Not once I brought to your attention the fact that power transfer would not work with ribbon microphones, as that would load the ribbon, resulting in SEVERE sensitivity loss, overdumping of the ribbon and frequency response anomalies (i.e. source of much more severe distortions, much worse noise figure, and bandwidth limitations, apart from severely affected sonic qualities).

Every single time you completely disregard any of that making some kind of weird associations, BSing about some bio polutions, UFO, Bible for Dummies, etc., i.e. anything except of straight answer.

So my point is, finally, please give a straight answer (i.e. what I have been asking you for about a year, so far.)

Thank you very much, M

 

[Guest]

You are free to open your own topic and ask. You'll get a lot of different opinions and suggestions from people (for free!). It is up to you to decide what to choose and try.

Here the question was, "why used"?
So, I answered why...
Then, the question was, "Why power transfer is needed", so I answered again, why...
However, I could advocate John's position, why power transfer is not necessary when used amplifying diodes as active elements, but he can advocate his position well without my help.

In brief, transistors are actually amplifying diodes. Semiconductor diodes have exponential law functions so distort terribly. In order to hide distortions under a rug deep feedbacks are used. Feedback by voltage decreases dynamic output resistance, serial feedback increases dynamic input resistance, so modern amps made with inverting opamps have low output resistance and high input resistance. However, it would be good to transfer as much as possible of a signal power (as I mentioned before), but input and output resistances of modern SMD rugs are highly non-linear (diodes, remember?), so impedance mismatch helps to decrease resulting distortions, i.e. to hide them under a rug. I.e. it is meaningless to use transformers between transistor stages.

Another story is transformers that drive cables and isolate / balance inputs. We speak in this topic about them (but not about power transformers, as you write: we mean signal power transfer, not a power from 120V outlet to a microwave oven!)

Cables are spreaded systems of inductances and capacitances, and if impedances on both ends are not equal to own cable's wave resistance, reflections occur. Also, dynamic microphones (I mean good ones) are designed for better frequency dependence when loaded on a certain impedance. Input transformers (good ones!) in mic preamps balance better on wide frequency range than transformerless inputs, resulting intermodulations between signals and synphase noises (RFI from cellphones, for example) are much less. I would say transformers there are preferrable when are cost-effective (depending on a budget!).

So, if say Behringer and his lower-end competitors abandoned input transformers that does not mean that transformers are bad. That means that their mass-consumers don't understand the difference, or they won't pay for it.

 

[Marik]

[quote author="Wavebourn"]You are free to open your own topic and ask. You'll get a lot of different opinions and suggestions from people (for free!). It is up to you to decide what to choose and try.

[/quote]

:roll:

 

[3nity]

WOW it's been a while..

My question now is how to de-balance a Mic input to feed a Discrete Operational amplifer...i know i can do that easily with 2 DOAs but if i want to use 1?

I was thinking to use some THAT chips but i'm not so sure.