Has my mains cable ruined my amp?
Isn't the purported relevance of these measurements utterly undermined by this comment? -
That's the problem. I'm yet to see a research done under 'normal home conditions'.
Isn't the purported relevance of these measurements utterly undermined by this comment? -
That's the problem. I'm yet to see a research done under 'normal home conditions'.
And it's a similar thing that Russ Andrews got in trouble for IIRC.
Isn't the purported relevance of these measurements utterly undermined by this comment? -
Good point, but I suspect that they wouldn't have spent thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of Dollars, developing a machine that was fundamentally flawed from the off.
In the FAQs, somebody asked something very similar (I think) - "Why is the amperage in the graph so high?"
The answer - "You may be thinking your CDP only pulls 1 Amp and your amplifier 12 Amps. So how can a test be valid that shows the cord drawing hundreds of Amps of current?
Read the DTCD white paper. Power supplies only pull current for 5% to 10% (or less) of the AC duty cycle. During the conduction period, the instantaneous current could be hundreds of Amps, but the long term average is only 1 to 20 Amps, depending on the device. Nb. If a power supply is drawing 20A (as measured by a current meter), then the peak current would be 100A to 200A instantaneous current"
So it would appear that this device is designed to" test a single current pulse".....so it needs to "simulate the AC electrical power grid, with its characteristics as a constant voltage source" as well as "mimic the action of a typical power supply when the rectifier turns on and off to fill the power supplies storage capacitors."
I'm not sure if this answers your query satisfactorily, but it's the best I can do.
Apparently "comparative subjective listening tests have been conducted spanning several years, under controlled conditions using blind and double blind tests, that repeatedly confirm the connection between system performance and DTCD. The results will be published along with more detailed information, in a series of supporting FAQ documents."
Spoke to Darren at Clearer Audio and he is sorting me out. Will let you know if it makes me happy.
That's good to hear. I hope he was as I described.
Looking forward to your findings
Cno
I bought the Chord superscreen and it arrived today. Did some testing and I dont think I can hear any difference so in short I can't. Think I will send it back and get my 60 quid back. Am glad that I tried it. Think I will try pluging straight into the wall as the conditioner I have coould be killing dynamics apparently according to another thread on here.
Isn't the purported relevance of these measurements utterly undermined by this comment? -
Good point, but I suspect that they wouldn't have spent thousands of hours and hundreds of thousands of Dollars, developing a machine that was fundamentally flawed from the off.
Well, it's not necessarily fundamentally flawed, as it may well have achieved exactly what they want. As they have control over the amount of power it seems to me they could probably simulate realistic conditions. Which probably means they have. Although they haven't published those results.
The answer - "You may be thinking your CDP only pulls 1 Amp and your amplifier 12 Amps. So how can a test be valid that shows the cord drawing hundreds of Amps of current?
Read the DTCD white paper. Power supplies only pull current for 5% to 10% (or less) of the AC duty cycle. During the conduction period, the instantaneous current could be hundreds of Amps, but the long term average is only 1 to 20 Amps, depending on the device. Nb. If a power supply is drawing 20A (as measured by a current meter), then the peak current would be 100A to 200A instantaneous current"
So it would appear that this device is designed to" test a single current pulse".....so it needs to "simulate the AC electrical power grid, with its characteristics as a constant voltage source" as well as "mimic the action of a typical power supply when the rectifier turns on and off to fill the power supplies storage capacitors."
I'm not sure if this answers your query satisfactorily, but it's the best I can do.
Fair enough. I quoted what they put, it wasn't my assessment. It seems to me they say 'up front' it isn't really valid, perhaps to avoid the sort of Russ Andrews liability, and a bit deeper try to row back from that. Seems inconsistent, at the least.
These would be very interesting to see, please post as and when you become aware that these have been published 
Also on this section of the site:
This seems like a reasonable statement to me.
OTOH I can see no support for the conclusions they claim to have reached, in the first FAQ, which also seem to be inconsistent with the part I've just quoted:
2. Some of these differences can be directly attributable to Dynamic Transient Current Delivery.
The main thought that occurs to me with this is that no objective testing appears to have taken place prior to the manufacture and distribution of their products. And as they claim this is the first machine of this type developed, the implication is no other manufacturer has ever measured their products. This does not seem an impressive approach to me.
I should say, I am as yet an agnostic with mains products, and in particular would like to get the chance to try a good mains regenerator, although I don't expect to get the chance for a long time.
@ Ben
I think your assessment is reasonable and well considered. If you read through their blurb, it explains how this device came into existence. Check out the section called "White Paper" and scroll down to the paragraph starting "We used a high power audio amplifier" (opposite the first graph). It describes how getting their results "indirectly" was inefficient.....so this device was conceived.
@ Ben
I think your assessment is reasonable and well considered. If you read through their blurb, it explains how this device came into existence. Check out the section called "White Paper" and scroll down to the paragraph starting "We used a high power audio amplifier" (opposite the first graph). It describes how getting their results "indirectly" was inefficient.....so this device was conceived.
They also say this:
This could actually be used as an argument for mains regneration, which in a sense is designed to do what their machine does. But it rather seems to disprove their philosophy that (in the real world) all can be solved with after market mains cable and that doing so is an entirely different 'philosophy' from mains regeneration.
@ Ben
I think your assessment is reasonable and well considered. If you read through their blurb, it explains how this device came into existence. Check out the section called "White Paper" and scroll down to the paragraph starting "We used a high power audio amplifier" (opposite the first graph). It describes how getting their results "indirectly" was inefficient.....so this device was conceived.
They also say this:
This could actually be used as an argument for mains regneration, which in a sense is designed to do what their machine does. But it rather seems to disprove their philosophy that (in the real world) all can be solved with after market mains cable and that doing so is an entirely different 'philosophy' from mains regeneration.
It also shows how fickle this whole area is, and how results can vary.
I didn't like the effect of an Isol 8 regenerator, but the Atlas Balanced transformer was much better.
IMO. If all this area gets debated in a reasonable manner, it does more good than harm.
It also shows how fickle this whole area is, and how results can vary.
I didn't like the effect of an Isol 8 regenerator, but the Atlas Balanced transformer was much better.
IMO. If all this area gets debated in a reasonable manner, it does more good than harm.
Oh man, if I'm doing more good than harm I'd better stop.... 
There's a couple of very happy users of the Pure Power regenerator with active ATCs. I believe price is around £2k. Given the cost and that I'm so happy with how my system sounds, I can only see myself trying this when I have changed the system (probably for ATC actives) and when I have lots of disposable income (probably won't happen again for 20 years, if ever
)
MattSPL is a huge fan of after market fuses, have you experimented with these?
MattSPL is a huge fan of after market fuses, have you experimented with these?
No, but they are on the perimeter of my radar.
MattSPL is a huge fan of after market fuses, have you experimented with these?
No, but they are on the perimeter of my radar.
Given their relatively modest cost, I am 
Matt recommends Hifi Tuning Supreme fuses IIRC. I would be interested to hear your thoughts as and when you do try as I would have thought the fuse would be a 'bottleneck' for those who are using and consider worthwhile aftermarket mains cable.
First musical mains cables now musical fuses?
Oh good grief!
Perhaps I should change out the fuses & mains cable on the SoundCraft Vi1 production mixer that I use every day to get a better sound 
Erm, no thanks, I think I'll stick with the original designer's specification istandard issue ordinary boring stuff that delivers 220 volts at the correct amperage.
However if one thinks one can hear the slightest accoustic difference by replacing a mains cable then it's money well spent.
You're going to hate this one then as changed my fuses so they are all Russ Andrews 13amp and things are sounding better. Think this is mainly because their was 5 amp fuses in the amp and TV plugs.






Spoke to Darren at Clearer Audio and he is sorting me out. Will let you know if it makes me happy.