Zack writes “This Amp was mentioned earlier on BoingBoing and it seems that a number of audio enthusiasts have dedicated time to dissecting it and putting together improved version. It is quickly becoming the “six million dollar man” of Audiophiles for its superior audio output, extraordinarily low cost and small form factor”. Link.
14 thoughts on “Tweaking the Sonic Impact T-Amp”
Comments are closed.
ADVERTISEMENT
Support Make:
Join Make: Community Today
Join Make: Community Today
It may be a good amplifier, but when the discussion goes on
to describe that it needs a 50 to 100 hour “break-in” I begin
to understand the level of technical incompetence of the reviewer.
alankilian, care to tell us about your competence before calling into question that of the reviewer? I thought the article was very well written, by TWO respected audiophiles (and dozens of others on the web). As for tweaking it (the actual topic suggested by Phillip), I thought the units at http://www.redwineaudio.com showed the possibilities of this revolutionary machine. The circuit board is definitely small enough to adapt to many cases, and the availability of upgrade parts is plentiful. I can’t wait to get started.
You shouldn’t read my critique without checking things out for yourself.
Any reasonably competent web-search will be able to show a HUGE number
of articles calling into question the snake-oil sale techniques of
many audio component manufacturers.
Items like audio cables and components needing “break-in” are very well
debunked by professionals.
Here’s a little thought experiment:
1) Audio amplifiers need breaking in.
2) The means that some of the electrical components are changing their characteristics during use.
3) That means that the characteristics of the components are not as good as they could be when the device is manufactured.
4) These components change and the audio gets better.
5) Somehow, these components stop changing when the audio gets great.
Now, here are some questions:
1) Why do the components change?
2) Why do they stop changing?
3) Why do they change in a direction that makes the audio get better?
4) Why don’t they change “too far” and make the audio worse after time?
5) Why don’t the manufacturers run the amp for 100 hours and then measure the component characteristics, and then build them that way in the first place?
As you can see, this is hokus-pokus non-physics, and is often thoroughly
debunked snake-oil.
Indeed one wonders if this isn’t just a ruse in the Alan Sokal vein.
Thought experiments are often used by those with little knowledge of empirical methods to make a political point, in the hope that those with even less empirical knowledge will swallow it.
In answer to the questions you throw up with your thought experiment:
1) Heat generated by the components (as no component is 100% efficient) alters their long-term performance. Ask anyone who knows anything about electronics about specification drift. Clue: Think about what capacitors are made of.
2) They don’t, they drift towards a stable state WRT. the operating conditions. Think of a 1/x graph.
3) Well, pass on this one. Maybe in some cases they don’t. Reports in this case suggest they do though. See the http://www.diyaudio.com forum for more testimonials (albeit subjective, but what isn’t in the world of hi-fi?).
4) See (2).
5) Cost. What’s cheaper: Running components in on the bench, or allowing a few reviews to convince consumers to run components in at home?
Your post might have carried more weight if your claim that “components needing “break-in” are very well
debunked by professionals” was backed up with some references. As is I smell snake oil myself.
Thought experiments are often used by those with little knowledge of empirical methods to make a political point, in the hope that those with even less empirical knowledge will swallow it.
In answer to the questions you throw up with your thought experiment:
1) Heat generated by the components (as no component is 100% efficient) alters their composition. Ask anyone who knows anything about electronics about specification drift. Clue: Think about what capacitors are made of.
2) They don’t, they drift towards a stable state wrt. the operating conditions. Think of a 1/x graph.
3) Well, pass on this one. Maybe in some cases they don’t. Reports in this case suggest they do though. See the http://www.diyaudio.com forum for more testimonials (albeit subjective, but what isn’t in the world of hi-fi?).
4) See (2).
5) Cost. What’s cheaper: Running components in on the bench, or allowing a few reviews to convince consumers to run components in at home?
Your post might have carried more weight if your claim that “components needing “break-in” are very well
debunked by professionals” was backed up with some references. As is I smell snake oil myself.
Thought experiments are often used by those with little knowledge of empirical methods to make a political point, in the hope that those with even less empirical knowledge will swallow it.
In answer to the questions you throw up with your thought experiment:
1) Heat generated by the components (as no component is 100% efficient) alters their long-term performance. Ask anyone who knows anything about electronics about specification drift. Clue: Think about what capacitors are made of.
2) They don’t, they drift towards a stable state wrt. the operating conditions. Think of a 1/x graph.
3) Well, pass on this one. Maybe in some cases they don’t. Reports in this case suggest they do though. See the http://www.diyaudio.com forum for more testimonials (albeit subjective, but what isn’t in the world of hi-fi?).
4) See (2).
5) Cost. What’s cheaper: Running components in on the bench, or allowing a few reviews to convince consumers to run components in at home?
Your post might have carried more weight if your claim that “components needing “break-in” are very well
debunked by professionals” was backed up with some references. As is I smell snake oil myself.