Julf
Facts are our friends
Are the UK and the Netherlands the only European countries using the (cheaper) ring scheme? Seems most other countries go for radial by default for domestic homes, based on the German model.
Anyone using mains filters/transformers/regenerators?
- Thread starter darrenyeats
- Start date
Are the UK and the Netherlands the only European countries using the (cheaper) ring scheme? Seems most other countries go for radial by default for domestic homes, based on the German model.
mikemusic
pfm Member
Thanks.
Sounds like a lot more thought before I do anything and plenty of other things I can do first
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Interesting ! I knew that France, Germany and many other countries used the radial system, but had no idea that the Dutch had opted for ring mains.
Julf
Facts are our friends
peter_964rs
That's no moon!
You are quite correct - from the incomer to a downstairs Memera CU and radials from there. It was a clear improvement, and at reasonable cost IIRC, certainly in comparison to a power regenerator or filter of Titan ilk. Just the hassle of routing cable and getting the electrician in to do the work.
Wow, Everywhere on earth has a different idea as how AC power should be applied. I used to assume that it all was very similar. Couldn't be more wrong. The more I read about rings, and other differences, the more I can see why each situation could be so different from the last. Each time that I have moved here in the states, I have noticed anything from no problems really nasty problems. They run the gamut from lousy power from the company to scary wiring way back from 1930. Since we are on a grid, the problems are compounded. Having moved into my house 6 years ago, I have made the city replace ALL of the 1930 power lines feeding 4 houses in my neighborhood, and strung through trees. Not even done yet, I had the house panel changed out, and placed a dedicated line to the stereo. Is it better? Maybe only in my mind lads.
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Think you're playing with a much lower voltage (110?) and at 60 c.p.sec. as opposed to our (and now much of western Europe) 240 nominal at 50 cycles per sec. Really don't know how this affects the general principles of domestic and hifi mains here, though dedication in all circumstances must be a good thing, I s'pose.
Julf
Facts are our friends
Mike Reed
pfm Member
Maybe Edison was right - maybe we should have kept using DC
As most electronica seems to work on DC, you have a point ! All those 'orrible little transformers polluting everything......
DevillEars
Dedicated ignorer of fashion
Hi Steve,
Sharing some experiences (with PPP), it's a good idea to adopt an "A:B:A test plan" and to incorporate in that plan two sub-sections: one, with power amp connected to Px; and two, with power amp not connected to Px (this will allow you to listen for any dynamic compression.
The "A:B:A" implies that, using the same source-mix and the same program material, 1) you listen critically to the system as it is currently and make notes in two separate columns labelled "Does Well" and Does Not Do Well" - trying to incorporate into the notes detailed descriptions of those aspects listed; 2) you add the Px to the system and - after a burn-in period (if indicated) - repeat the auditioning using the same source-mix and program material as in 1. above - making new notes in the same format but also highlighting any changes for the better or for the worse; and 3) remove the P5, effectively restoring the configuration to its original state and re-run the test regimen making notes as in 2. above (i.e. including any changes noted).
At this stage - time permitting - connect all components to the Px EXCEPT the power amp (left connected to mains socket) and repeat the A:B:A process.
You could potentially add an element of blind testing by inviting someone to participate in the A:B:A auditioning (and also make their own notes), but to go any further than that in the timespan could be tricky.
The key to this overall process lies in the analysis of the notes made in the 3-stages (A, B, A) of the process - particularly any anomalies in "differences" noted in A:B and B:A comparisons. This last aspect to counter a human aspect (we expect a difference, so we "hear a difference" when there isn't one).
Finally, don't treat this process as a "chore" - look upon it as an interesting challenge (one's mindset can also influence perceptions).
So, have fun!
Dave
Julf
Facts are our friends
But unless you really do a properly controlled, double-blind ABX test, there is still a possibility of expectation bias affecting the result.
darrenyeats
pfm Member
Julf, correct. Also there needs to be a statistically significant number of results to draw a scientific conclusion, which is probably not practical. However, one blind test can be very useful for putting the size of potential differences (if they exist) into personal perspective.
DevillEars
Dedicated ignorer of fashion
Hi Julf,
In these days where political-correctness is paramount, let's re-word the above:
Next, let's add some Oirish logic...
A comparative PC monitor picture quality review was - at the behest of another ABX pundit - carried out as a "properly controlled, double-visually-challenged ABX test" but the results were inconclusive...
Applying the same "logic" to the OP's evaluation of an audio-related component, maybe the correct comparative approach should embody the following: " a properly controlled, double-aurally-challenged (i.e. "double-deaf") ABX test". I mean, we don't want any subjective auditory cues to subvert the objective evaluation process, do we?
End of minor rant (had too much aggravation on audio newsgroups years ago to get into debates around ABX/double-blind testing for personal purchase decision support)...
Whatever the Objectivists say, this audio hobby/passion of ours remains, at its core, a Subjective experience, which is why we like some things and dislike others - be they audio components or pieces of music. To attempt to force an objective evaluation process into a subjective experience where the additional effort/time required is not insignificant, amounts to overkill...
A very wise man once said to me: "It's better to be approximately correct within the available time window than to be 100% correct two years later!"
I've found this axiom to be an invaluable guideline when evaluating procedural options...
Dave
Julf
Facts are our friends
Sure. We all have our reasons for liking the gear we have - some more rational than others.
Nobody is forcing anything on anyone here. All we are discussing is what you need to do *if* you want to have objective verification. Your choice.
DevillEars
Dedicated ignorer of fashion
Hi Julf,
Don't get me wrong here - I have no issues with Double-Blind/ABX testing when the circumstances dictate a result that requires some form of justification or substantiation - such as, for example, in a dissertation for a Masters degree of in a doctoral thesis. In both these cases, there is a real need for supporting and unquestionable objective evidence for any conclusions reached in the investigation/analysis. Credit is also given for providing a logical path and linkage-set from approach through results to conclusions and the ABX approach provides this.
I used to have these discussions on rec.audio.high.end with a gentleman who used the user name of Arnie Kruger (which, I was led to believe, was his given name) and my main concern at the time was that there were circumstances when ABX was applicable but that there were also circumstances when it was not justifiable.
So, I have no issue with your post in isolation - I just believe that, for the OP's needs, it would involve extra complexity and effort that would offer little or no real value to the OP.
The OP has been offered a home trial/audition of a power re-generator that could cost him somewhere between £3,000 and £4,500 (depending on whether its a P-5 or a P-10). He makes no mention of having given the dealer providing the unit any commitment to buy if the unit provides sufficient improvement/value, although one might argue that an ethical commitment applies when agreeing to such a loan...
When I went through a similar loan, I made it abundantly clear to the local distributor (a mate) that the decision on whether or not to buy the PPP would be based on a number of factors - including other pending expenditures.
This loan/trial was always going to be a personal and subjective evaluation of whether the benefits derived from the PPP outweighed those benefits of alternative funds allocations. As it turned out, the PPP fell short and the funds were used for non-audio purposes.
Had I not gone through the process and, instead, allowed an impulse to govern the decision, I would have regretted it (and sat with a device that turned out to have a design fault in that version as tested).
The OP needs to decide - its his responsibility - and all I was suggested was that he apply some structure to the loan/trial to help counter (i.e. reduce) any self-fulfilling prophecy aspects - not to eliminate them.
Good luck to the dude...
Julf
Facts are our friends
Hi, Dave,
There is a youtube recording of "The Great Audiophile Debate" between Arny (Arnold B.) Krueger and John Atkinson here. Nothing new there - believers continue to believe, sceptics continue to be sceptic
Sure - I have no issue with that. It was just that when you wrote:
I wanted to make sure that nobody walked away with the impression that a sighted ABA test would be sufficient to eliminate perceptional bias. The OP might or might not be concerned about that bias.
There is a youtube recording of "The Great Audiophile Debate" between Arny (Arnold B.) Krueger and John Atkinson here. Nothing new there - believers continue to believe, sceptics continue to be sceptic
Sure - I have no issue with that. It was just that when you wrote:
I wanted to make sure that nobody walked away with the impression that a sighted ABA test would be sufficient to eliminate perceptional bias. The OP might or might not be concerned about that bias.
I did have in mind trying various connection regimes as you suggest and leaving just the power amp connected directly to the mains was definitely in there.Hi Steve,
Sharing some experiences (with PPP), it's a good idea to adopt an "A:B:A test plan" and to incorporate in that plan two sub-sections: one, with power amp connected to Px; and two, with power amp not connected to Px (this will allow you to listen for any dynamic compression.
............
So, have fun!
Dave
However, for auditioning stuff I have found that I hear more if I just relax and do something mindless like playing solitaire on my phone while I am listening. This technique has worked very well over the last year with selecting a phono amp and then a power amp.
I think I if sit down trying to take notes I will in very short order decide that doing some gardening is a lot more enjoyable.
As for program material, I tend to both play use the same program material in some of my comparisons and to also just carry on just listening to whatever music takes my fancy at other times.
When comparing the Pure Audio Vinyl to the Naim Superline I found that they were so close when I tried to really listen critically that I was not really enjoying trying to compare them in that way. However, when I just relaxed and and swapped them over every few hours it was the Vinyl that I found myself always looking forward to going back to. More critical listening had allowed me to eliminate a couple of other contenders pretty quickly but when it came down to the money shot it was just not up to the task.
Steve
If twas me you were referring to then that is pretty much as it is, except I don't have any ethical committment either.Hi Julf,
.....
The OP has been offered a home trial/audition of a power re-generator that could cost him somewhere between £3,000 and £4,500 (depending on whether its a P-5 or a P-10). He makes no mention of having given the dealer providing the unit any commitment to buy if the unit provides sufficient improvement/value, although one might argue that an ethical commitment applies when agreeing to such a loan...
...
I went in there to check up on the eta of my new rcm and to have a general natter, including winding him up about his golfing, and I noticed the blinking light of one of those PS Audio noise harvesters. After discussing that for a bit and having a look at the insides of one we got onto the 'discussions' about whether those sort of things actually do anything. Part way through the discussion he said something like. "I think I will call them and get one of those big power regenerators down. It should get here next week, do you want to try it out over the holiday and let me know what you think?" He mentioned a NZ$10k price tag so I assume it will be the P10.
I do have one of those Noise Harvesters going at home at the moment (again offered to try out). Not sure I have heard any difference but it is a cool device nevertheless. One thing I have not noticed since I put it in is any transformer hum but since that comes and goes anyway the jury is still out on that one.
And when it comes to bias, I am rather hoping that the P10 does not do anything as I have other things to spend that sort of money on - but then I also thought that before trying out expensive phono stages...
Steve