New phono stage from SOTA

@mijostyn  : Absolutely I agree and that's all about. Good!

 

R.

Dear @dogberry  :  " is hopeful, at best ".

Well in the link posted  ( the first one. ) those gentlemans came from CalTech, MIT and AES, so are not ametaurs but gentlemans with high knowledge levels and try to explain as better they can:

 

" From the fact that changes in subjects' EEGs "persist in the absence of high frequency stimulation," Oohashi and his colleagues infer that in audio comparisons, a substantial silent period is required between successive samples to avoid the second evaluation's being corrupted by "hangover" of reaction to the first. The preprint gives photos of EEG results for only three of sixteen subjects. I hope that more will be published ".

At the end is that exist lower than we can think knowledge levels by scientist of the overall human being TRUE " operation " whole body and specially this high frequency main subject because who cares about when it's enough that " somebody " says: " inaudible " and that's it. Rigth?

R.

@mijostyn  : What we can sense and what we need to know how measure, where measure, tools, etc. etc is extremely complex in a human being body where the brain knowledge by scientist/neurologist is only 27% and this 27% not inclusive in " deep " fashion . Your ears maybe can detect 18khz however you listen a way higher frequencies and even the brain sinthetized following harmonics by its incencious memory experiences during your life.

 

So not you or me or any one else could say: this is inaudible. Well you listen 24khz that is inaudible conciensous for you.

 

https://www.britannica.com/science/human-sensory-reception

 

https://www.britannica.com/science/human-sensory-reception/Nerve-function

 

We all have to learn, I'm learning from this thread about because I have to make some searh on that issue.

Who win? everybody, not me or you but everybody.

 

R.

 

 

@mijostyn  : You are trying to win and this is not the issue.

 

I never post  or talk about 200khz, so what's all about.

 

Re-read and then post again or leave that way but please don't try to win, it's not the main subject:

 

""" Given the existence of musical-instrument energy above 20 kilohertz, it is natural to ask whether the energy matters to human perception or music recording. The common view is that energy above 20 kHz does not matter, but AES preprint 3207 by Oohashi et al. claims that reproduced sound above 26 kHz "induces activation of alpha-EEG (electroencephalogram) rhythms that persist in the absence of high frequency stimulation, and can affect perception of sound quality." [4] Oohashi and his colleagues recorded gamelan to a bandwidth of 60 kHz, and played back the recording to listeners through a speaker system with an extra tweeter for the range above 26 kHz.   """

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn  : I'm sorry to read that coming from you with out any evidence that can support your " idea " when here is the support ( linked. )/evidence of what the whole body can listen ( bones are only a media in our body and I think that you read but not really read the brain preambule information:

 

"" X. Significance of the results

 

Given the existence of musical-instrument energy above 20 kilohertz, it is natural to ask whether the energy matters to human perception or music recording. The common view is that energy above 20 kHz does not matter, but AES preprint 3207 by Oohashi et al. claims that reproduced sound above 26 kHz "induces activation of alpha-EEG (electroencephalogram) rhythms that persist in the absence of high frequency stimulation, and can affect perception of sound quality." [4] Oohashi and his colleagues recorded gamelan to a bandwidth of 60 kHz, and played back the recording to listeners through a speaker system with an extra tweeter for the range above 26 kHz. This tweeter was driven by its own amplifier, and the 26 kHz electronic crossover before the amplifier used steep filters. The experimenters found that the listeners' EEGs and their subjective ratings of the sound quality were affected by whether this "ultra-tweeter" was on or off  """"

 

Please you or any one else come here with true evidence/facts that proves that our wole organism can't listen over 20khz and why can't.

 

With all respect your opinion about means " nothing " in favor or against that issue with out " support ". Mijo, bone is only and example and not even you can prove that changes in the air SPL can't be detected by bones. 

 

R.

Dear @mijostyn  : " with other senses this occurs with the lowest frequencies. I have not seen any evidence that we can perceive higher frequencies. "

 

Not exactly becauase exist that evidence. Thhe next information is only the preamble ( that unfortunately I can't share by a link ) and yes this will be a long post but interesting for some of us:

 

 

 

"" Your brain doesn't like to keep secrets. Studies at the University of Texas, Austin, have shown that writing down secrets in a journal or telling a doctor your secrets actually decreases the level of stress hormones in your body. Keeping a secret, meanwhile, does the opposite.

Your brain also doesn't like stress hormones. So when you have a secret to tell, the part of your brain that wants to tell the secret is constantly fighting with the part of your brain that wants to keep the information hidden, says neuroscientist David Eagleman.

"You have competing populations in the brain — one part that wants to tell something and one part that doesn't," he tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross. "And the issue is that we're always cussing at ourselves or getting angry at ourselves or cajoling ourselves. ... What we're seeing here is that there are different parts of the brain that are battling it out. And the way that that battle tips, determines your behavior."

Eagleman's new book, Incognito, examines the unconscious part of our brains — the complex neural networks that are constantly fighting one another and influencing how we act, the things we're attracted to, and the thoughts that we have.

"All of our lives — our cognition, our thoughts, our beliefs — all of these are underpinned by these massive lightning storms of [electrical] activity [in our brains,] and yet we don't have any awareness of it," he says. "What we find is that our brains have colossal things happening in them all the time."  

 

Take a close look at yourself in the mirror. Beneath your dashing good looks churns a hidden universe of networked machinery. The machinery includes a sophisticated scaffolding of interlocking bones, a netting of sinewy muscles, a good deal of specialized fluid, and a collaboration of internal organs chugging away in darkness to keep you alive. A sheet of high-tech self-healing sensory material that we call skin seamlessly covers your machinery in a pleasing package.

And then there's your brain. Three pounds of the most complex material we've discovered in the universe. This is the mission control center that drives the whole operation, gathering dispatches through small portals in the armored bunker of the skull.

Your brain is built of cells called neurons and glia — hundreds of billions of them. Each one of these cells is as complicated as a city. And each one contains the entire human genome and traffics billions of molecules in intricate economies. Each cell sends electrical pulses to other cells, up to hundreds of times per second. If you represented each of these trillions and trillions of pulses in your brain by a single photon of light, the combined output would be blinding.

The cells are connected to one another in a network of such staggering complexity that it bankrupts human language and necessitates new strains of mathematics. A typical neuron makes about ten thousand connections to neighboring neurons. Given the billions of neurons, this means there are as many connections in a single cubic centimeter of brain tissue as there are stars in the Milky Way galaxy.

The three-pound organ in your skull — with its pink consistency of Jell-o — is an alien kind of computational material. It is composed of miniaturized, self-configuring parts, and it vastly outstrips anything we've dreamt of building. So if you ever feel lazy or dull, take heart: you're the busiest, brightest thing on the planet.

Ours is an incredible story. As far as anyone can tell, we're the only system on the planet so complex that we've thrown ourselves headlong into the game of deciphering our own programming language. Imagine that your desktop computer began to control its own peripheral devices, removed its own cover, and pointed its webcam at its own circuitry. That's us.

And what we've discovered by peering into the skull ranks among the most significant intellectual developments of our species: the recognition that the innumerable facets of our behavior, thoughts, and experience are inseparably yoked to a vast, wet, chemical-electrical network called the nervous system. The machinery is utterly alien to us, and yet, somehow, it is us.

 

 If you were to injure your pinkie in an accident you'd be distressed, but your conscious experience would be no different. By contrast, if you were to damage an equivalently sized piece of brain tissue, this might change your capacity to understand music, name animals, see colors, judge risk, make decisions, read signals from your body, or understand the concept of a mirror — thereby unmasking the strange, veiled workings of the machinery beneath. Our hopes, dreams, aspirations, fears, comic instincts, great ideas, fetishes, senses of humor, and desires all emerge from this strange organ — and when the brain changes, so do we. So although it's easy to intuit that thoughts don't have a physical basis, that they are something like feathers on the wind, they in fact depend directly on the integrity of the enigmatic, three-pound mission control center.

 

Brains are in the business of gathering information and steering behavior appropriately. It doesn't matter whether consciousness is involved in the decision making. And most of the time, it's not. Whether we're talking about dilated eyes, jealousy, attraction, the love of fatty foods, or the great idea you had last week, consciousness is the smallest player in the operations of the brain. Our brains run mostly on autopilot, and the conscious mind has little access to the giant and mysterious factory that runs below it.

 

The brain works its machinations in secret, conjuring ideas like tremendous magic. It does not allow its colossal operating system to be probed by conscious cognition. The brain runs its show incognito. So who, exactly, deserves the acclaim for a great idea? In 1862, the Scottish mathematician James Clerk Maxwell developed a set of fundamental equations that unified electricity and magnetism. On his deathbed, he coughed up a strange sort of confession, declaring that "something within him" discovered the famous equations, not he. He admitted he had no idea how ideas actually came to him — they simply came to him. William Blake related a similar experience, reporting of his long narrative poem Milton: "I have written this poem from immediate dictation twelve or sometimes twenty lines at a time without premeditation and even against my will." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe claimed to have written his novella The Sorrows of Young Werther with practically no conscious input, as though he were holding a pen that moved on its own. """

 

https://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/life_above_20khz.pdf

 

Please read at the end of page 7 ( Significance results. ).

https://www.tinnitusjournal.com/articles/response-of-human-skull-to-boneconducted-sound-in-the-audiometricultrasonic-range.pdf

 

"""" Although hearing by air conduction is limited to ap�proximately 20 kHz, hearing by bone conduction ex�tends to at least 100 kHz [16-19J. Lenhardt et al. [17J demonstrated that speech modulating an ultrasonic car�rier could be understood to some degree, and Staab et al. [18J presented further speech recognition data using an ultrasonic hearing aid based on the work by Len�hardt  """"

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/jn.2000.83.6.3548

https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/27898/can-humans-perceive-sounds-above-20-khz

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4005747/

https://www.tinnitusjournal.com/articles/boneconduction-propagation-in-the-humanbody-implications-for-highfrequency-therapy.pdf

https://www.scientific.net/JBBBE.52.1

 

 

Now neurologist and scientist agree that the brain knowledge does not goes up to 27% of it and in the whole organism function not more than 38%.

Mijos, as you I'm and ovjective audiophile like true facts/measurements/sharts/diagrams and the like in the overall room/audio system but at the same time and as yiu I have common sense where subjectivity always is involve.

 

So and in this particular issue no scientist or mathematics or electrical theories or engineers can prove that you or me can't " listen " what for mathematics and the like is an inaudible sound for us or any audiophile, no one . I think and you can't prove I'm wrong that " inaudible " high frequencies puts its " color " to what any one of us can concious hear.

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

 

 

Dear @wynpalmer4  : I really do not disagree with your concept of neutrality in your design in what I'm not totally sure is in those " non-empirical  " refered in your post:

" Your preferences are, frankly, inconsequential without some non-empirical basis to support them. "

 

In non-empirical basis researchs tells that human been can listen from as down 4hz to over 50khz because you and any one else " hear " with all our body not only the ears

We " listen " through the bones, through the body skin, through the hair, through the millions of nervous terminations in the body, through the muscles and so on.

But each human been  whole body it's " damaged " in different ways against any other human been for ovbious reasons as age, health level, life experiences, mood, life type of nutrition and the like that along other reasons affects any single body cell. So what our brain detect is not exactly the same on each audiophile.

From all those and more comes the preferences. You said that your design is neutral and technically can be but I imagine you voiced it in different room/audio systems and I think that one way or the other you are biased ( with good reasons. ) to your design.

 

Of course only and opinion.

 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.

 

 

Dear @wynpalmer4  : Here in México we say " free-lancer " to some experts that give support by free or through $$.

 

" Your perspective on the effect of feedback is, in my opinion, facile, "

 

I posted about only to say that no matter what and as any audio item has its own " color " not neutral. If that color is neutral for you fine with me.

R.

Dear @mkiser : That phono stage was designed using op-amps and that’s why is so unexpensive but the design is not a discrete one but all through those op-amps that normally uses very high feedback. Today op-amps are way better than in the past but I prefer discrete overall SS circuits.

SOTA chhhhoosed Wynn for the design and this gentleman was working for several years in Analog Devices Corp. ( now he is a free-lance engineer ) designing between other parts op-amps and even he posted here in Agon that he was in the proccess to a phono stage design and that even that he in the past designed current mode op-amps ( that's the fashion today ) he choosed for a voltage design.

Yes, op-amps has low distortion/noise levels but as any kind of audio item/devices along that high feedback puts his color in the reproduced sounds, no matters what.

That they compared against a 24K phono stage means almost nothing with out know if that 24K unit was surrounded for a room/system of that level. I mean that a 24K phono stage normally is in a room/system way over 150K+ and there I think that any one could hear the differences and not for the better. I can be wrong because I never listened the SOTA.

 

Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,

R.