MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

New Product Announcement: Low Impedance Bus Board
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Author New Product Announcement: Low Impedance Bus Board
GenusModu
New Product Announcement: We are releasing the Low Impedance Bus Board, for virtually any eurorack power distribution need. See the link below for more details.

Announcing the Low Impedance Bus Board, the quietest passive Eurorack bus board you can buy. The Genus Modu Web site, Facebook page and Youtube channel are live for more information. Further technical data including comparisons to flying bus cables, 1 ounce copper bus strips and "heavy" 4 ounce copper bus boards will be released in the coming weeks. LIBB ships in about 3 weeks. Parts and PCBs are at the manufacuturer now, the same place that does Moog PCB assemblies, so LIBB is a fully professional build. Retail price is $89, good through March 1, 2018.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb.html

https://www.facebook.com/genusmodu/

Futuresound
Looks useful. How many can be safely daisy-chained?
GenusModu
I recommend just one daisy chained bus board, for an applications such as a 2 row 6U skiff or portable cabinet. That solution will still be quieter than any current single bus board solution.

You could of course daisy chain as many as you want, but that begins to defeat the purpose of maintaining low noise.

Instructions for star wiring will be provided in additional documentation that is not yet posted.
snakejaw
I am an electrical neophyte (but am very motivated to learn more). This seems interesting. I currently have a switching power supply, but I'm considering replacing it will an Acopian TD12-850 linear psu to reduce noise and and allow for plenty of power as my modular grows. What, if any, differences might you see between using this bus board with a switching psu and linear psu? Thanks.
WaveRider
curious if you could document differences in audio razz

..like real world examples
GenusModu
WaveRider wrote:
curious if you could document differences in audio razz

..like real world examples


Yes, that is coming. A real module setup with flying bus cables, 1 oz bus board, 4 oz bus board and LIBB. Stay tuned. It will be posted on the web site and some portions on the youtube channel.
GenusModu
snakejaw wrote:
I am an electrical neophyte (but am very motivated to learn more). This seems interesting. I currently have a switching power supply, but I'm considering replacing it will an Acopian TD12-850 linear psu to reduce noise and and allow for plenty of power as my modular grows. What, if any, differences might you see between using this bus board with a switching psu and linear psu? Thanks.


Acopian is a good choice. I worked there in my college days. You have probably found my PSU recommendation page which lists the Acopian power supplies and other linears.

You will see only 50/60 Hz and the first few harmonics with a linear PSU. For a switching PSU then LIBB can make a serious dent in the noise compared to other solutions. I posted switching psu noise comparisons with flying bus cables, 1 ounce copper bus board, 4 ounce copper bus board and LIBB to my Facebook page. There will also be a posting at the web site soon.
snakejaw
Small world! No, I haven't seen your PSU recommendation page. (Eric at Metasonix recommends Acopian.) Please post a link! Thanks.
GenusModu
snakejaw wrote:
Small world! No, I haven't seen your PSU recommendation page. (Eric at Metasonix recommends Acopian.) Please post a link! Thanks.


Main page: http://www.genusmodu.com/index.html

Power Supply recommendations: http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html
2disbetter
I'm sold.

A few questions (of which I am sure more will materialize):
Do these have to be mounted within your case? Could you use an adhesive instead?

If mounting is necessary, does it matter if the case is completely metal itself?

And finally when will these be available for sale?

2d
youkon
I think (from an extensive adhesive tape user perspective): this works:-)
youkon
your bus boards are for me the best product of 2018 so far! (doesn't count that it's January)
2disbetter
youkon wrote:
I think (from an extensive adhesive tape user perspective): this works:-)


Sure it does. I think the concern is when/if the adhesive comes undone that it could cause a fire.

2d
GenusModu
Boards are $89. Ordering from the Genus Modu web site opens 1-2 days. SynthTech will also be selling them direct.

I cannot recommend adhesive mounting as it will eventually give way and not only damage the board but also modules inside your system, when shipping or moving the product. I have a brand name skiff with glue mounts for the power/distro pcb and the mounts have already come loose.

The LIBB manual has some info on mounting. Use the supplied hardware for metal cabinets. For wood cabinets you either need much longer 4-40 screws for the wood side, or supply your own wood screws and non-threaded spacers to mount, for wood 1/2 inch or thicker.
snakejaw
Does anyone know much noise can be further reduced by passing modular audio output through something like the Intellijel Audio Interface balanced outputs when connecting to your other (balanced) hardware?
GenusModu
snakejaw wrote:
Does anyone know much noise can be further reduced by passing modular audio output through something like the Intellijel Audio Interface balanced outputs when connecting to your other (balanced) hardware?


Balanced outputs do not reduce your modular's noise, they just pass it along. I am using Intellijel Audio Interface to get the audio to my MOTU 16A for computer FFTs and wave recordings.

Balanced connections will mostly reduce the AC hum induced between the systems. I saw additional benefit with an Ebtech hum eliminator.
windspirit
Looks solid but it seems like 16 spots might be a bit tight? If you have a couple of 4HP (or even 2HP) modules in there you might run out of positions. Is this meant to be a bus for a single row?
GenusModu
windspirit wrote:
Looks solid but it seems like 16 spots might be a bit tight? If you have a couple of 4HP (or even 2HP) modules in there you might run out of positions. Is this meant to be a bus for a single row?


LIBB is meant for a single row, to fit within an 84 hp space alongside SynthTech's forthcoming Skunkworx Little Stinker power supplies. That limits the length of the board. I could consider a longer 20 connector solution in the future if there is sufficient demand.
GenusModu
Ordering for the Genus Modu Low Impedance Bus Board is now open. Please read all of the following before placing your order.
1) Be sure to read the instruction manual and look at the installation template to insure you understand everything needed for the install. Here are the direct links:
http://www.genusmodu.com/files/LIBB/LIBB-manual.pdf
http://www.genusmodu.com/files/LIBB/LIBB_A2_Mounting_Template.pdf
2) The web site has a list of recommended power supplies that meet the criteria for very low noise. Direct link here: http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html
However, you can use any power supply you choose, not just the recommended ones.
3) The boards start assembly this week at the manufacturer. Shipping to customers is expected to begin in 2.5 weeks.
4) If you have any questions or concerns, please inquire at genome@genusmodu.com or on Muffs before ordering.
5) For larger (5+) or bulk orders, inquire at sales@genusmodu.com before placing an order.
6) The following pricing is special introductory limited time pricing, good until March 1, 2018. After that, LIBB price will increase by $10.
7) Shipping is included in all of the following prices, which is why they are different per region.
8) US introductory pricing is $89 per Low Impedance Bus Board.
9) Canada introductory pricing is $99 per Low Impedance Bus Board.
10) For the Rest of the World introductory pricing is $109 per Low Impedance Bus Board.
9) Payment is accepted through Paypal at the email sales@genusmodu.com.
10) A buy it now link will be added to the web site in a few days.
GenusModu
Paypal "Buy Now" buttons are up on the Low Impedance Bus Board (LIBB) page at the Genus Modu web site. http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb.html
youkon
would be interested where the Doepfer PSU3 is settled in your psu recommendation list?
GenusModu
youkon wrote:
would be interested where the Doepfer PSU3 is settled in your psu recommendation list?


Doepfer PSU3 ends up at zero since they can't publish their own specs. I will not recommend a power supply without legitimate specs or that I haven't tested myself.
GenusModu
The Low Impedance Bus Board is now shipping from stock. Reminder: the introductory pricing of $89 expires on March 1, 2018. Details are on the web site.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb.html
neil.johnson
Looks like an interesting product.

I see you have a CE mark. I had a quick hunt around your website but couldn't find a copy of the Declaration of Conformity, so I was wondering which applicable safety directives the product complies with.

I also found your white paper lacking in important details. For example, none of your scope shots show the horizontal or vertical axes so other than "ooh wiggly line" there's not much else you can say about them. It would also have been useful to see a comparison between your system and a busbar-based distribution system, an approach that seems to be gaining some traction.

Thanks,
Neil
GenusModu
neil.johnson wrote:
Looks like an interesting product.

I see you have a CE mark. I had a quick hunt around your website but couldn't find a copy of the Declaration of Conformity, so I was wondering which applicable safety directives the product complies with.

I also found your white paper lacking in important details. For example, none of your scope shots show the horizontal or vertical axes so other than "ooh wiggly line" there's not much else you can say about them. It would also have been useful to see a comparison between your system and a busbar-based distribution system, an approach that seems to be gaining some traction.

Thanks,
Neil


CE Mark is for RoHS II.

The "scope" shots you refer to are more likely the Wavelab/DAW "scope" screen captures which would never have absolute measurements anyway. I referenced the amplification amounts in the white paper. Nearly all tools of that type lack resolution at the low amplitude levels needed for noise analysis. I tried many options and was not fully satisfied with any of them.

I agree real world bus bar tests would be an interesting comparison. Have you asked Graham Hinton for his results for a eurorack system? I've never seen any either.
neil.johnson
Hi,

Quote:
The "scope" shots you refer to are more likely the Wavelab/DAW "scope" screen captures which would never have absolute measurements anyway. I referenced the amplification amounts in the white paper. Nearly all tools of that type lack resolution at the low amplitude levels needed for noise analysis. I tried many options and was not fully satisfied with any of them.

Perhaps the wrong tool then? I'm sure one of your Keysight oscilloscopes would be suitable together with a fixed gain amplifier. At the moment all I see is a squiggly line without axes, and some gain value, which together still means nothing. I could lend you my HP 400F which will measure down to a few microVolts RMS.

Quote:
I agree real world bus bar tests would be an interesting comparison.

Agreed, except your results aren't real world - you use a bench power supply (which, as you state yourself, no-one else would use to power a Eurorack system), together with a specific set of modules that very few people are likely to have the exact same setup and therefore your results are mildly interesting at best. Without knowing exactly what your collection of modules is doing to the rails it is difficult to predict how well your system will perform with any other set of modules.

Quote:
Have you asked Graham Hinton for his results for a eurorack system? I've never seen any either.

On MW there are various posts from Graham containing actual repeatable measurements; for example, in this post
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2548854&highlight=#2 548854
Graham provides a measurement of 50-60 microOhms on a 17" busbar (about 6-7 times better than your LIBB according to your "Worst case resistance measurements" table). That is a measurement that can be repeated and verified.

I could go on further, a lot further, but to what end? I do hope your boards sell well as they are definitely a step up from those abominable flying busboards. As to how well your solution holds up under the many and varied system configurations only time will tell. All I would ask is this: cut out the BS and snake oil - the audio hifi world has more than enough to go around without the modular synth world contributing its own.

Neil
GenusModu
Neil,

neil.johnson wrote:
Hi,

Quote:
The "scope" shots you refer to are more likely the Wavelab/DAW "scope" screen captures which would never have absolute measurements anyway. I referenced the amplification amounts in the white paper. Nearly all tools of that type lack resolution at the low amplitude levels needed for noise analysis. I tried many options and was not fully satisfied with any of them.

Perhaps the wrong tool then? I'm sure one of your Keysight oscilloscopes would be suitable together with a fixed gain amplifier. At the moment all I see is a squiggly line without axes, and some gain value, which together still means nothing. I could lend you my HP 400F which will measure down to a few microVolts RMS.

No thanks, no competent engineer would use a piece of antique test equipment like the HP 400F to do modern day measurements.

If you cannot understand a gain of +94, +90 or +72 dB and a full scale image of the resulting waveform, well I don't know what to say. It is pretty clear to people who have read the white paper. The corresponding FFTs show the detailed frequency amplitude information. The recording fidelity at the DAW is what matters to the euro user, more so than readings of millivolts or microvolts.

Reminding here for folks who have not seen the white paper that all power bus measurements are given in actual units, milliVolts peak to peak, milivolts rms and in dBV for spectrums.

neil.johnson wrote:

Quote:
I agree real world bus bar tests would be an interesting comparison.

Agreed, except your results aren't real world - you use a bench power supply (which, as you state yourself, no-one else would use to power a Eurorack system), together with a specific set of modules that very few people are likely to have the exact same setup and therefore your results are mildly interesting at best. Without knowing exactly what your collection of modules is doing to the rails it is difficult to predict how well your system will perform with any other set of modules.


Here's the quote on the power supply: "The high specification bench power supply was chosen to reduce dependencies of any particular power supply and to focus on the interaction between modules and their shared power connection under the best possible circumstances."

So...if I used a noisier power supply that would be more helpful? Not for the experiment that was being run. Your complaint is baseless.

The comment on module selection is ridiculous. By that logic no selection of modules or parameters is valid, therefore let's not ever provide any results. Folks are tired of arguing about theories without concrete data on how it helps their recordings.

Your last sentence is correct. Every different set of modules, every different set of parameters or selected algorithms, every change of power bus solution and every different position of the modules provide a different test result. Other people have definitely gotten that message from the white paper.

There seems to be some mistaken idea that the results represent the absolute value of noise in a eurorack modular system, or tries to show some repeatable test that can be duplicated anywhere. Nowhere does it say that in the text. Please read it. It is a study of the same configuration with four different power bus solutions, for comparison purposes on typical noise differences, and providing guidance on how much improvement can be gained from the power bus or the output module choices.

Show any other comparison of real eurorack audio outputs to a recording solution for eurorack power solutions. Why is presenting that data so controversial?

neil.johnson wrote:

Quote:
Have you asked Graham Hinton for his results for a eurorack system? I've never seen any either.

On MW there are various posts from Graham containing actual repeatable measurements; for example, in this post
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2548854&highlight=#2 548854
Graham provides a measurement of 50-60 microOhms on a 17" busbar (about 6-7 times better than your LIBB according to your "Worst case resistance measurements" table). That is a measurement that can be repeated and verified.

LIBB resistance measurements are also repeatable and verified with professional calibrated equipment. Your comparison seems to imply otherwise.

But that's not the measurements I was talking about. I was talking about audible results. It could be scope plots or DAW recording waveform and FFT images. Those results for bus bars do not exist to the best of my knowledge. If you know otherwise, please provide the link.

neil.johnson wrote:

I could go on further, a lot further, but to what end? I do hope your boards sell well as they are definitely a step up from those abominable flying busboards. As to how well your solution holds up under the many and varied system configurations only time will tell. All I would ask is this: cut out the BS and snake oil - the audio hifi world has more than enough to go around without the modular synth world contributing its own.

Neil

LIBB is selling very well thank you.

The statement "BS and snake oil" is completely bogus. I present more data than anyone has ever seen, and you come back and attack it. Have you ever designed a power delivery network? Do you know what it is? Come back to us when you've read and understood one of the standard engineering tests on Power Integrity. I've seen nothing here to show you understand the concepts that you are refuting. It is not snake oil, it is 21st century power engineering design.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
PM33AUD
I have a few lock-in amps (PAR something or another) that are older than me - I'd thought to use them to do some low noise testing for distribution - anyone try sth like this? You'd have to know the LI source but for an isolated and controlled test maybe a valuable tool, no? They also have some assortment of plugin LN amplifier modules which is how I've usually gotten past the relatively high noise floor of any scope I'd used though the LIA method gets you far lower into the dirt.

The bus-bar approach vs this LIBB is definitely a bit different as they do have different initial design requirements IMO - but the end goal is ultimately the same - less noise. I like the bus-bar approach myself because it's easy and it works well. It also feels good to have a really heavy case but that's just me being silly. The reality (even for myself these days!) is that most folks do need portable systems and linear with copper or even aluminum distribution bars is real PIA to lug around unless you have $$$ to move it. Even my most portable effort is over 40kg and requires sense lines, fancy connectors, and very liberal linkage of any separate distribution boards. There is no way I can move that around unless it's in my own car or in a much larger flight case. Flying with it is just not practical until I get 'famous.'

For my LLDB prototypes, I did a 'musician can understand me' test where I simply recorded audio with a 'normal' high-pitched whine w/o the bars installed, (it was distribution noise, not some noise coupled into an audio jack though it's the same thing at the end of the day for unbalanced system) then I installed the bars and recorded again. It wasn't a scientific test but you wouldn't have wanted to record the material without the bars. I did measure the total bus DCR with some kelvin probes and a fancy new Keithley 2000 and of course it was much improved over any PCB based solution. The module that was causing the issues was one with lots of PWM'd LEDs. It's pretty easy these days to have some offender modules and sometimes it's nice to know simply how that would affect your recorded material. When you find yourself notching your tracks or staying away from dynamics plugins, you realise very quickly how important power/distribution become.

So a combination of 'real world' easy to understand tests (mostly for musicians) and scientific ones are needed. I think you'll get a bunch of technical folks (and not technical ones too!) trying to poke some holes at various efforts. You have to also consider that engineering is such a huge field. Not everybody is an expert at all aspects. I know I am not and surely still learning!

Anyways, I appreciate the work y'all have done here and it's a honourable place to spend time - I'll get around to more carefully reading through the data in the not too distant future!
GenusModu
PM33AUD wrote:

For my LLDB prototypes, I did a 'musician can understand me' test where I simply recorded audio with a 'normal' high-pitched whine w/o the bars installed, (it was distribution noise, not some noise coupled into an audio jack though it's the same thing at the end of the day for unbalanced system) then I installed the bars and recorded again. It wasn't a scientific test but you wouldn't have wanted to record the material without the bars. I did measure the total bus DCR with some kelvin probes and a fancy new Keithley 2000 and of course it was much improved over any PCB based solution. The module that was causing the issues was one with lots of PWM'd LEDs. It's pretty easy these days to have some offender modules and sometimes it's nice to know simply how that would affect your recorded material. When you find yourself notching your tracks or staying away from dynamics plugins, you realise very quickly how important power/distribution become.

So a combination of 'real world' easy to understand tests (mostly for musicians) and scientific ones are needed. I think you'll get a bunch of technical folks (and not technical ones too!) trying to poke some holes at various efforts. You have to also consider that engineering is such a huge field. Not everybody is an expert at all aspects. I know I am not and surely still learning!

Anyways, I appreciate the work y'all have done here and it's a honourable place to spend time - I'll get around to more carefully reading through the data in the not too distant future!


Interesting. I did not realize you were playing back the power bus noise directly in your bus bar/board examples. I have to say as I am taking more measurements of power bus, audio outputs and audio recordings, there is only a partial correlation to power bus noise and amount of audio noise. If it was 100% then LIBB would look even better at the audio outs, as it is the only one that really filters audio frequency noise.
meatbeatz
I'm most interested to see LIBB test results with vs without your selection of caps as this seems to be where your design differs from other low resistance busboards/busbars. You mention in your white paper that you are unsure as to what degree the caps are improving your results yet it seems to be your main selling point (otherwise we are looking at a 6 layer PCB with a bunch of connectors). Are you able to remove the caps to show how they improve output noise across the spectrum?
paults
tl;dr version

Buss bars are a low RESISTANCE solution. Great for large currents (like 10s of amps). You should see the buss bars in a typical battery plant in a telephone exchange (think the sizes of a 2 x 6)

The LIBB is BOTH a low resistance and a low IMPEDANCE solution.

A buss bar does nothing to a 300mv pk-pk, 1MHz switcher ripple.

It's not 'snake oil', come on Neil you're better than this (unless you have a horse in this race).
jimi23
Got one on the way! Enjoyed the whitepaper. One thing I found interesting was FBB vs 1oz copper BB performance. I do have a switching PSU, so I thought I'd give this a test as I get some audible HF noise at times.

I do wish the shipping options for Rest of World were a bit different though, I was potentially going to buy a few but copping a shipping surcharge per board didn't give any incentive.

Will these be available through retailers? Other than through Synthtech with their upcoming power supply
Joe.
paults wrote:
A buss bar does nothing to a 300mv pk-pk, 1MHz switcher ripple.


We will never know Dead Banana

Despite the years and years that different PSU solutions have been peddled here, every single producer refuses to do a comparative test.

It's amazing what claims you can make, about which designs are 'better', when you choose not to release actual data showing your product compared to others thumbs up
GenusModu
jimi23 wrote:
Got one on the way! Enjoyed the whitepaper. One thing I found interesting was FBB vs 1oz copper BB performance. I do have a switching PSU, so I thought I'd give this a test as I get some audible HF noise at times.

I do wish the shipping options for Rest of World were a bit different though, I was potentially going to buy a few but copping a shipping surcharge per board didn't give any incentive.

Will these be available through retailers? Other than through Synthtech with their upcoming power supply


I have two US retailers and one UK retailer lined up for LIBB distribution, working on Germany.
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
I'm most interested to see LIBB test results with vs without your selection of caps as this seems to be where your design differs from other low resistance busboards/busbars. You mention in your white paper that you are unsure as to what degree the caps are improving your results yet it seems to be your main selling point (otherwise we are looking at a 6 layer PCB with a bunch of connectors). Are you able to remove the caps to show how they improve output noise across the spectrum?


I'm not that unsure actually, I just like to validate everything with data. The Z vs Frequency chart predicts effective power line filtering beginning around 3-4 KHz, and that's what we see in the power rail driven noise from the attenuverter module. Removing the caps will worsen the response at high audio frequencies, just the amount is the question. I'd like to do that test, but I have other tests that are higher priority.

I'm working on data now for the Euro Header Adapter kit. Power bus spectrum plots are consistently better between LIBB and FBC, 7 dB for 2 KHz range, 12 dB for 48 KHz, 13 dB for 600 KHz and 11 dB for 6 MHz. Those numbers are just the averages, peaks tend to be reduced 18 to 25 dB. That is the caps doing their job on the power rail.
meatbeatz
LoFi Junglist wrote:
Despite the years and years that different PSU solutions have been peddled here, every single producer refuses to do a comparative test.


I don't know of anyone that has refused to test their boards. More likely they lack the equipment, know-how, R&D budget or they are satisfied with their own testing enough to affix their logo to it. Otherwise most manufacturers design to the best of their knowledge (for better or worse).

Re: comparative tests, I'd like to have seen these include a wider range of known aggressor modules, modules susceptible to bleed, a wider range of known passive busboards, different (larger) sized systems, common bus noise vs audio path noise etc. Also a comparison to a range of well known/popular active busboards would help potential customers understand why they might choose LIBB passive distro over an active solution as used in the majority of eurorack cases.

I think it's safe to say LIBB performs favourably to several unknown products but a comparative test doesn't mean a lot without knowing what it's being compared to. The LIBB PCB screw terminal in itself is partially contributing to better results over busboards that use connectors with high contact resistance.

Personally I'd like to see LIBB tested with and without the low ESR caps which would show the degree to which LIBB outperforms a busboard of equally low resistance. It would be as simple as removing them from the PCB and the results would speak for themselves.
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
I'd like to do that test, but I have other tests that are higher priority.


No probs, watching with interest. Thanks for your commitment to improving eurorack power! smile
paults
General comments below [pot stirring.......maybe]

a) to point out "Well, not EVERY POSSIBLE thing was tested" is silly. We tested things easily available, is the Hinton system "easily available"? Is it used by more than 20 people, really?

b) there are reasons in these types of test we don't want to give away TOO much about the caps used, what the caps contribute, etc. You want to know, go figure it out [eyeroll]

c) also, the Euro 'community' [COUGH] doesn't seem to appreciate pointing out things like 'aggressor' modules, because UNFAIR SLAGGING (insert reddit term here). As the modular poster boy of STOP SLAGGING OTHER MANUFACTURERS YOU ASSHOLE especially here on this list, what exactly is gained here? Yes, believe me, John found a metric shit-ton of both aggressors and victims but we just chose a representative example.

Lastly: ever notice the general 'tone' of these EEs versus the world discussions? Snake Oil! And my personal favorite: WHAT I USE WORKS GREAT FOR ME!!!

So we use an EXAMPLE setup , in a CONTROLLED environment, with $30K of test equipment and IMMEDIATELY we get the usual stuff (BTW which I 100% predicted would happed when John & I were discussing the white paper).

And in all the 'flak', the data is still there: LIBB works, it's not "snake oil", it's a combined 58 years of EEs in industry who have been designing power systems since 1977 that REALLY WE SWEAR we know EXACTLY what we are doing. REALLY.
GenusModu
paults wrote:


And in all the 'flak', the data is still there: LIBB works, it's not "snake oil", it's a combined 58 years of EEs in industry who have been designing power systems since 1977 that REALLY WE SWEAR we know EXACTLY what we are doing. REALLY.


[Cough] It is more like 70 years of combined EE industry experience.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:

a) to point out "Well, not EVERY POSSIBLE thing was tested" is silly. We tested things easily available, is the Hinton system "easily available"? Is it used by more than 20 people, really?


Well that would be silly if it were the case, but it's not. The comparisons I suggested above (on the subject of comparative tests) would have been more useful to the end user in showing how LIBB could improve on what they already have rather than product x,y,z.

paults wrote:

b) there are reasons in these types of test we don't want to give away TOO much about the caps used, what the caps contribute, etc. You want to know, go figure it out [eyeroll]


I already know. The claim here is that the low ESR caps are what makes the difference over a similarly low (or lower) resistance busboard yet the whitepaper neglects provide data in support of this. meh

paults wrote:

c) also, the Euro 'community' [COUGH] doesn't seem to appreciate pointing out things like 'aggressor' modules, because UNFAIR SLAGGING (insert reddit term here). As the modular poster boy of STOP SLAGGING OTHER MANUFACTURERS YOU ASSHOLE especially here on this list, what exactly is gained here? Yes, believe me, John found a metric shit-ton of both aggressors and victims but we just chose a representative example.


LIBB's promo material is essentially slagging every other busboard solution out there, so why not? More info is needed on the competitor busboards other than just copper thickness. Without more comparative info the white paper reads like a lengthy infomercial.

paults wrote:
Lastly: ever notice the general 'tone' of these EEs versus the world discussions? Snake Oil! And my personal favorite: WHAT I USE WORKS GREAT FOR ME!!!


Yes I have. It would seem the vast majority of people are happy with poor power distro (until they're not). wink

paults wrote:
So we use an EXAMPLE setup , in a CONTROLLED environment, with $30K of test equipment and IMMEDIATELY we get the usual stuff (BTW which I 100% predicted would happed when John & I were discussing the white paper)

And in all the 'flak', the data is still there: LIBB works, it's not "snake oil", it's a combined 58 years of EEs in industry who have been designing power systems since 1977 that REALLY WE SWEAR we know EXACTLY what we are doing. REALLY.


We can see that LIBB works but in the plethora of info contained in the white paper it is still unclear to what degree when you could have chosen the 3 crappiest busboards on the market to compare it to. Pretty simple point really and no engineering qualifications required to make it. If anyone is going to call "snake oil" it'd be over such unqualified comparisons not that the board doesn't work as advertised.

What we are interested in as musicians/music producers is whether these improvements are audible. I don't think anyone cares how a busboard performs up into the MHz. Also comparing passive busboards when most people use active busboards is irrelevant to those potentially looking to upgrade from their active busboard.

I'm not looking to pick holes in this product, I'm making suggestions that I feel would better help qualify your claims (if I don't someone else will). I think this development is a great step forward in many respects and hopefully will spark other manufacturers to up their game. smile
paults
a) So, if we specifically say "We tested the X flying cables, the Y model of 1oz buss board and the Z model of the 4oz" (ie called them out by name), that is 'useful' but then 'slagging'? Can't have your cake and eat it, too.

And no, we are not going to test EVERY one because that's not useful if we don't name them. it's the OTHER people's job to refute our "claims" if they think we are wrong or misrepresented. See, this is all tied back to the Euro "community" (hold hands, sing around campfire, whatever). When we claim "the best" and show we are in fact "the best" this is seen as 'bad karma, bro' or something. If the other suppliers want to make their own measurements, OK.

2) if you don't think "having to worry about" high-frequency noise in audio is necessary, then you need a schoolin' and please do research on 'pn junction rectification'. You don't hear THE 500Khz noise, you hear the ARTIFACTS CREATED by the 500Khz noise.

3) Again: someone has to go first, so we went first. As in all 'marketing', there are 'claims' and there are 'facts' and we believe we have presented a fair, unbiased account of EXACTLY what we did, exactly HOW we did it, and the RESULTS. Maybe John dialed the rhetoric up a notch or 2 more than I would have. I chalk this up to 'rookie excitement'.

But you know, it's really REALLY hard to listen to counter-arguments when people today use non-shrouded headers. Really.
Mungo
meatbeatz wrote:
Without more comparative info the white paper reads like a lengthy infomercial.
In many ways it is the classic advertising claim of a product being much better than unspecified other "competitor", we could certainly find other bus boards on the market which would produce similarly excellent results so the only caution is not claiming this to be the singular best but simply better than most.

Not revealing the specific problematic modules is a classy move, there is no need to point out a particular example of bad practice when there are many many out there. It wouldn't be fair to point to just one but taking the time to work through enough of the available products to produce a list of good and bad examples would be expensive and time consuming and beyond what could be expected.

neil.johnson wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
The "scope" shots you refer to are more likely the Wavelab/DAW "scope" screen captures which would never have absolute measurements anyway. I referenced the amplification amounts in the white paper. Nearly all tools of that type lack resolution at the low amplitude levels needed for noise analysis. I tried many options and was not fully satisfied with any of them.

Perhaps the wrong tool then?
The "scope" shots are relatively uninformative, they are a short capture of a much longer scale noise and can be easily manipulated by selectively picking particular segments. I don't think they add much value to the document but the measured values from the special measurements are comparable figures and well presented.

I'm already recommending this product to customers, its one of the few that actually goes through and publishes some typical performance/specifications. There is a fair bit of marketing puffery, confusing promotion, and a few doubtful claims but its still much better than most products out there. The underlying design is well thought out and realised and hopefully people can take the time to look past the hype to see whats simply a good product.
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:

a) to point out "Well, not EVERY POSSIBLE thing was tested" is silly. We tested things easily available, is the Hinton system "easily available"? Is it used by more than 20 people, really?


Well that would be silly if it were the case, but it's not. The comparisons I suggested above (on the subject of comparative tests) would have been more useful to the end user in showing how LIBB could improve on what they already have rather than product x,y,z.

paults wrote:

b) there are reasons in these types of test we don't want to give away TOO much about the caps used, what the caps contribute, etc. You want to know, go figure it out [eyeroll]


I already know. The claim here is that the low ESR caps are what makes the difference over a similarly low (or lower) resistance busboard yet the whitepaper neglects provide data in support of this. meh

paults wrote:

c) also, the Euro 'community' [COUGH] doesn't seem to appreciate pointing out things like 'aggressor' modules, because UNFAIR SLAGGING (insert reddit term here). As the modular poster boy of STOP SLAGGING OTHER MANUFACTURERS YOU ASSHOLE especially here on this list, what exactly is gained here? Yes, believe me, John found a metric shit-ton of both aggressors and victims but we just chose a representative example.


LIBB's promo material is essentially slagging every other busboard solution out there, so why not? More info is needed on the competitor busboards other than just copper thickness. Without more comparative info the white paper reads like a lengthy infomercial.

paults wrote:
Lastly: ever notice the general 'tone' of these EEs versus the world discussions? Snake Oil! And my personal favorite: WHAT I USE WORKS GREAT FOR ME!!!


Yes I have. It would seem the vast majority of people are happy with poor power distro (until they're not). wink

paults wrote:
So we use an EXAMPLE setup , in a CONTROLLED environment, with $30K of test equipment and IMMEDIATELY we get the usual stuff (BTW which I 100% predicted would happed when John & I were discussing the white paper)

And in all the 'flak', the data is still there: LIBB works, it's not "snake oil", it's a combined 58 years of EEs in industry who have been designing power systems since 1977 that REALLY WE SWEAR we know EXACTLY what we are doing. REALLY.


We can see that LIBB works but in the plethora of info contained in the white paper it is still unclear to what degree when you could have chosen the 3 crappiest busboards on the market to compare it to. Pretty simple point really and no engineering qualifications required to make it. If anyone is going to call "snake oil" it'd be over such unqualified comparisons not that the board doesn't work as advertised.

What we are interested in as musicians/music producers is whether these improvements are audible. I don't think anyone cares how a busboard performs up into the MHz. Also comparing passive busboards when most people use active busboards is irrelevant to those potentially looking to upgrade from their active busboard. I'm not looking to pick holes in this product, I think it's a great step forward in many respects. I am making suggestions that I feel would better help qualify your claims (if I don't someone else will). smile


Your request for comparative tests amount to thousands of hours of work, for products that don't provide a single spec of their own. Why should I do that? The test results in the white paper represent the three main classes of power distribution. FYI I did not choose the "crappiest" products out there. Products were chosen to be representative of their category. The category results are not going to vary that much due to the limitations of their similar geometries. There is no reason to test them all when I know the results will be almost the same. Maybe it is not that obvious to other folks. How can I help people understand that?

For your ESR question, it works, there is zero question on that. I was only questioning the extent of the improvement in one specific test, and it is now being interpreted as having no idea of whether it did anything. That is not what was written. Again, as I wrote earlier, look at the attenuverter audio noise spectrum results and the differences between the solutions.

The white paper has data to inform the eurorack user on how much difference they might see with different power solutions. If data is considered slagging then I can't help that. Be happy with the data I provided. Before the white paper there was ZIP - nothing. If you don't like the data, or want more data, then you or the community can provide their own. We would all love to see more data.

A comparison to powered bus boards was not provided as I was not providing a powered solution.

Thanks for your comments. I do appreciate feedback which can help better communicating these complicated topics to a non-technical audience.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
a) So, if we specifically say "We tested the X flying cables, the Y model of 1oz buss board and the Z model of the 4oz" (ie called them out by name), that is 'useful' but then 'slagging'? Can't have your cake and eat it, too.


Useful info would be to provide more info than the copper thickness eg: type and position of input terminals, orientation and position of output headers, number of layers, on-board capacitance etc. would go a long way in illustrating the difference in noise levels as seen in the whitepaper.

paults wrote:
And no, we are not going to test EVERY one because that's not useful if we don't name them. it's the OTHER people's job to refute our "claims" if they think we are wrong or misrepresented. See, this is all tied back to the Euro "community" (hold hands, sing around campfire, whatever). When we claim "the best" and show we are in fact "the best" this is seen as 'bad karma, bro' or something. If the other suppliers want to make their own measurements, OK.


And that's what I'm doing. I feel that the data is somewhat misrepresented in that the graphs compare to busboards described only in terms of copper thickness. Again I'm NOT suggesting you test every other board on the market but that you provide more information on what LIBB is being tested against.

paults wrote:
2) if you don't think "having to worry about" high-frequency noise in audio is necessary, then you need a schoolin' and please do research on 'pn junction rectification'. You don't hear THE 500Khz noise, you hear the ARTIFACTS CREATED by the 500Khz noise.


I get it. I work with two EE's (60+ years combined experience) that have explained this to me at great length while pointing out how LIBB could be improved. Again, all the end user cares about is whether PSU/module noise and associated artefacts are in fact audible.

paults wrote:
But you know, it's really REALLY hard to listen to counter-arguments when people today use non-shrouded headers. Really.


Well you might not like it but with so many incorrectly assembled IDC cables in the wild there is an argument against the use of shrouded headers (well at least without very clear instructions on how to check your cables). However I'm with you on this, the only good thing about using IDC cables for euro power is the polarizing key which has completely gone to waste when using non-shrouded headers. :(
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
For your ESR question, it works, there is zero question on that. I was only questioning the extent of the improvement in one specific test, and it is now being interpreted as having no idea of whether it did anything. That is not what was written. Again, as I wrote earlier, look at the attenuverter audio noise spectrum results and the differences between the solutions.


Not at all. My question relates to "how much improvement" not "if there is any" and given the amount of work you've put into your white paper removing the caps from LIBB to illustrate the improvement would have been a drop in the ocean.

GenusModu wrote:
Be happy with the data I provided. Before the white paper there was ZIP - nothing. If you don't like the data, or want more data, then you or the community can provide their own. We would all love to see more data.


100% although Mungo provides complete specs for his active busboard there isn't much out there.

GenusModu wrote:
A comparison to powered bus boards was not provided as I was not providing a powered solution.


I think your potential customer base would be most interested in LIBB's comparison to the big name active busboards as they are used in the vast majority of cases (both pre-built and DIY). Maybe when Paul releases the Skunk Worx power supply we'll get a better idea of how the system performs as a whole.

GenusModu wrote:
Thanks for your comments. I do appreciate feedback which can help better communicating these complicated topics to a non-technical audience.


No problem and thanks again for your efforts. smile
mskala
I think there's a place for independent reviewers to do comparative tests of products. It doesn't have to be manufacturers testing their own products in an obvious conflict of interest. Manufacturers will do their own tests anyway just because it's part of the development process; but expecting them to publish all their internal results and have the results be convincing to everyone on Muffwiggler at all levels of skill including the trolls makes very little sense. I don't know where the idea came from that manufacturers were obligated to even attempt that.

All these modular magazines, v-logs, and similar publications could be doing comparative tests. It is part of their mission.
paults
Quote:
All these modular magazines, v-logs, and similar publications could be doing comparative tests. It is part of their mission.


And curious what your opinion is of such places:

a) having degreed EEs on staff with industry experience in power supply/distribution (say min. of 10 years, because that's how long it takes to START to be good at it)

b) $30,000 of test equipment
mskala
I have no more faith in manufacturers than in magazines.
GenusModu
Chris Meyer is doing some "informal" tests of different bus solutions for Learning Modular.
paults
Quote:
I have no more faith in manufacturers than in magazines.


This is probably the most bizarre thing I've seen on MW, and I've seen a LOT.

So, if you want to buy a new phone, and the specs say "4.3in screen" you have no faith in that? See, that's a MEASUREMENT. It's not a CLAIM.

When we say "LIBB reduces broadband noise 4x better than a typical 1oz copper bussboard", that's a MEASUREMENT. A CLAIM would be "There is no better passive bussboard available", because there is no data to support that as not every bussboard was tested. But when you market a product, you have a mixture of both [shrug].

If you see a Plaits video and it says "16 different algorithms" do you want an independent test lab to count them?

Now, I fully 'get' that there are people in Euro that kind of wish the 'community' was some island of "helpful DIY folk" + "friendly manufacturers free of the usual commercial BS" and somehow Euro is 'immune' from other areas of MI (like say.....guitar pedals or drums). And that's OK, it's just at some point, in order for us (the manufacturers) to be able to both provide reliable, solid products and elevate the Euro so that this CONTINUES, we all have to do some 'degree' of marketing.

Now power supplies are the hardest thing to do correctly. The entire synth history is full of crappy power supplies (OB-anything, P5, even the Moog modular). And now we have switchers to deal with, thrown into a 'Wild Wild West' sort of mentality.

Like John (and I) have been saying: we encourage other power supply providers (bussboards, active bussboards, etc) to make these same type of measurements. If there is improved methodology we can retest.

But please don't lump us with the $3,000 HDMI cables. All that audiophile crap is based on CLAIMS and not MEASUREMENTS.
paults
Quote:
Well you might not like it but with so many incorrectly assembled IDC cables in the wild there is an argument against the use of shrouded headers

If you were to try to make the 'case' at any "real" company (say Dell, Cisco, Lockheed, whatever) that because someone's drunk girlfriend while binge-watching Netflix can't figure out which way to turn the header around that's good enough to NOT put on a keyed connector to PREVENT those "bad cables", you would be laughed out of the room.

If you can't even make a CABLE correctly, how can you make a MODULE? And why in the world are you even MAKING cables AT ALL when there are literally 100s of cable shops worldwide that can make (and wait for it......TEST) cables for 1/3 of your parts including free drunk girlfriend labor.

See, it's this VERY SORT OF CRAP that drags down ALL of us in Euro.

How about this: If you paid $400 for a new TV and then bought a $3 Monoprice HDMI cable that was WIRED WRONG and blew up the TV, would you BLAME THE TV? Would you shrug and say "Well, there's a lot of mis-wired HDMI cables out there, it's just part of the home consumer thing".

No, you wouldn't. So WHY does Euro get some kind of "free pass"? WHY???
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
Quote:
Well you might not like it but with so many incorrectly assembled IDC cables in the wild there is an argument against the use of shrouded headers

If you were to try to make the 'case' at any "real" company (say Dell, Cisco, Lockheed, whatever) that because someone's drunk girlfriend while binge-watching Netflix can't figure out which way to turn the header around that's good enough to NOT put on a keyed connector to PREVENT those "bad cables", you would be laughed out of the room.

If you can't even make a CABLE correctly, how can you make a MODULE? And why in the world are you even MAKING cables AT ALL when there are literally 100s of cable shops worldwide that can make (and wait for it......TEST) cables for 1/3 of your parts including free drunk girlfriend labor.

See, it's this VERY SORT OF CRAP that drags down ALL of us in Euro.

How about this: If you paid $400 for a new TV and then bought a $3 Monoprice HDMI cable that was WIRED WRONG and blew up the TV, would you BLAME THE TV? Would you shrug and say "Well, there's a lot of mis-wired HDMI cables out there, it's just part of the home consumer thing".

No, you wouldn't. So WHY does Euro get some kind of "free pass"? WHY???


I know this and I've had many an argument regarding shrouded headers on eurorack busboards, trust me. Euro doesn't get a free pass, it's just that there are probably 10's of thousands of incorrectly made IDC cables already in circulation and the end user unless otherwise warned of this will plug their cable in the only way it fits and puff the magic smoke. The 'eurorack' specification as set out by Doepfer states: "unboxed headers only" so blame Doepfer for trying to save a few bucks. My solution: use boxed headers and provide an info sheet with a clear warning regarding cables. This way we can once again enjoy the convenience and protection of shrouded headers.
mskala
paults wrote:
But please don't lump us with the $3,000 HDMI cables. All that audiophile crap is based on CLAIMS and not MEASUREMENTS.


Paul, you're way out of line. I didn't say anything about $3,000 HDMI cables, nor about the "community" being "free of commercial BS," nor any of the other nonsense you seem to want me to defend. I posted in this thread attempting to support your position. My point was that you're not obligated to defend your measurements from trolls. How you perceived that as an attack is beyond me, but I won't make the mistake of supporting you again.

*plonk*, as we used to say on Usenet.
bobbcorr
paults wrote:
See, it's this VERY SORT OF CRAP that drags down ALL of us in Euro.


As Euro evolves from an Enthusiasts Only marketplace into a more mainstream one, it's imperative to re-think everything associated with creating a usable setup. I've noticed some of the vendors in the marketplace doing just that - removing mystery from the process and making it easy to connect musicians with instruments they can learn to play, as opposed to being obliged to learn to build.

And of all of the pieces of this instrument we all love so much, IMO the most critical and the most mis-understood aspect by mainstream consumers is power. It's a black art to the vast majority of people, and we don't care to become experts. We just want something that works reliably, quietly and safely.

If you need an example, look at what Moog is doing. They get it. They've made power a non-issue by delivering complete products.

As soon as @paults and the rest of his merry gang of pirates deliver a complete solution (busboard, connectors, power supply, a 2-4 HP on switch) I will be in line with my wallet open. And there will be a lot of enthusiastic mainstream consumers waiting there with me. Because we have no time or interest to engage in sophistry and we trust experience more than marketing.

*plonk*
dysonant
Another consumer point of view here. My time is limited, I have learned way more about electronics than I have had the time or inclination. To have a eurorack power supply and distribution solution that is simple, reliable, powerful would be brilliant. I've now used at least 8 different power supplies over 4 years in varying cases and each has had their own unique issues. I'm tired. I'm bored. I just want to spend my time making music without having to troubleshoot the instruments used to make it.

Would I like to see comparative specs? Sure, but on a retailer's website. I would not expect Genelec to post specs for Focal monitors. So I do not see the point of asking one manufacturer to call out another. I do however see the point of starting a trend to post said specs clearly, in a consistent manner across the industry.

meatbeatz I want your case. If your power specs are posted and I can compare them to the Genus Modu LIBB, I will be able to make an informed decision.

I'm enjoying the debate, but in the end I only care about the music.
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:
2) if you don't think "having to worry about" high-frequency noise in audio is necessary, then you need a schoolin' and please do research on 'pn junction rectification'. You don't hear THE 500Khz noise, you hear the ARTIFACTS CREATED by the 500Khz noise.


I get it. I work with two EE's (60+ years combined experience) that have explained this to me at great length while pointing out how LIBB could be improved. Again, all the end user cares about is whether PSU/module noise and associated artefacts are in fact audible.


There is nothing missing or there by accident on LIBB. Anyone who believes they can do a better solution - do it and test the hell out of it and provide the results to the market.

The thing about EE engineering advice is you have to know when it is wrong. I often hear wrong advice from experienced engineers because they start with wrong assumptions. With all your questions it does not seem you can challenge their advice at the same level as them. That leaves you at a disadvantage unfortunately. Good luck.
Mungo
bobbcorr wrote:
As soon as @paults and the rest of his merry gang of pirates deliver a complete solution (busboard, connectors, power supply, a 2-4 HP on switch) I will be in line with my wallet open. And there will be a lot of enthusiastic mainstream consumers waiting there with me. Because we have no time or interest to engage in sophistry and we trust experience more than marketing.
There are already packaged and high performance power supplies on the market:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2613778#2613778
That even surpasses the specifications that paults has been promoting. Eurorack market is maturing and falling into the normal models where only the big companies with marketing budgets cut through and sell products, regardless of their actual benefits. You just need to look at the Trogotonic push over the last year to see that people don't understand/care about the important specifications of a power system and just want the cheapest available that is promised to work (even with unhappy customers they have enough new customers coming in from the hype that they don't care)
bobbcorr
Mungo wrote:
bobbcorr wrote:
As soon as @paults and the rest of his merry gang of pirates deliver a complete solution (busboard, connectors, power supply, a 2-4 HP on switch) I will be in line with my wallet open. And there will be a lot of enthusiastic mainstream consumers waiting there with me. Because we have no time or interest to engage in sophistry and we trust experience more than marketing.
There are already packaged and high performance power supplies on the market:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2613778#2613778
That even surpasses the specifications that paults has been promoting. Eurorack market is maturing and falling into the normal models where only the big companies with marketing budgets cut through and sell products, regardless of their actual benefits. You just need to look at the Trogotonic push over the last year to see that people don't understand/care about the important specifications of a power system and just want the cheapest available that is promised to work (even with unhappy customers they have enough new customers coming in from the hype that they don't care)


I'm a bright person. That thread is an impenetrable fog of obfuscation.

When markets are new, visionaries and early adopters can and will slog through just about anything. When they begin to mature, companies that can "cross the chasm" and reach the early majority customers do so with a combination of excellent products, excellent messaging, clear differentiation and an ability to establish market reach.

I may not be an expert on eurorack power but I am an expert on marketing. And it's not a dirty word. It's what leaders use to differentiate products and dominate their chosen market segments. And I'm happy to see that segment of this market beginning to mature along those four dimensions.

Those companies with superior solutions better get some superior marketing or they're toast.
DSC
bobbcorr wrote:

Those companies with superior solutions better get some superior marketing or they're toast.


If by 'toast' you mean they don't have to deal with free market bullshit then I agree completely! Sometimes the best solutions are not available commercially. I know, scary the thought. You mean you the individual might have to figure it out for yourself, oh, please say it aint' so! But what happens when I make my decision and it is wrong? Who can I blame, surely not myself. thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up
bobbcorr
DSC wrote:
bobbcorr wrote:

Those companies with superior solutions better get some superior marketing or they're toast.


If by 'toast' you mean they don't have to deal with free market bullshit then I agree completely! Sometimes the best solutions are not available commercially. I know, scary the thought. You mean you the individual might have to figure it out for yourself, oh, please say it aint' so! But what happens when I make my decision and it is wrong? Who can I blame, surely not myself. thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up thumbs up


By toast I mean they miss out on market growth. I have absolutely nothing against boutique vendors or incredibly dedicated buyers. But heads up - the larger marketplace is made up of regular people.

My original premise stands. Superior marketing plus superior products always wins in growing market segments. As long as a market remains small, word-of-mouth is the best marketing, exactly because the market is small and it's cheap/effective to rely on person-to-person messaging. Like a bulletin board.

Have a nice day. smile
DSC
Eurorack IS boutique, in case you have not noticed. You are preaching to the choir. Great sermon, but kinda stating the obvious, right?
bobbcorr
DSC wrote:
Eurorack IS boutique, in case you have not noticed. You are preaching to the choir. Great sermon, but kinda stating the obvious, right?


It's getting less boutique by the day. Making power easier to choose, install and use will accelerate that.
Joe.
mskala wrote:
All these modular magazines, v-logs, and similar publications could be doing comparative tests. It is part of their mission.


Except they're not staffed, or properly equipped to do those tests. They don't have the authority to do the tests.

If you produce power supplies commercially it is part of the law that you have calibrated test equipment.

If a Power Supply producer (whether it's a PSU or Busboard) doesn't have 10 random Euro modules, I'd suggest they shouldn't be selling at all, it's exactly the same as module producers that dont have actually have a system (and yes, there has been a few).

So, a Producer should have some modules, calibrated test equipment and the expertise to do the tests themselves... So why isn't it happening?

All they have to do is buy a couple of other producer's PSUs or Busboards and show the results. One or two graphs. Get an apprentice to draw them up, we don't care, we just want to see actual data for once.

paults wrote:
it's the OTHER people's job to refute our "claims" if they think we are wrong or misrepresented.


This is absolutely ridiculous. lets all pretend that the first post after that is published won't be "your not qualified, im an EE with x years experience', or 'you dont have the $xx,xxx of Calibrated test equipment like meeee' meh

paults wrote:
When we say "LIBB reduces broadband noise 4x better than a typical 1oz copper bussboard", that's a MEASUREMENT. A CLAIM would be


No it's not a measurement. Referencing a 'typical' anything is scammy. It's up to personal interpretation what a 'typical' thing is.

Every single time a SMPS is mentioned, and it is implied that it is inferior in any way to another PSU, that's a claim.

A SMPS cost like $20. A passive busboard isn't much more. A regulated busboard is less than the cost of a module. Avoiding the tests is getting ridiculous at this point.

It's not slander or libel to releas data that's been collected.
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
There is nothing missing or there by accident on LIBB. Anyone who believes they can do a better solution - do it and test the hell out of it and provide the results to the market.

The thing about EE engineering advice is you have to know when it is wrong. I often hear wrong advice from experienced engineers because they start with wrong assumptions. With all your questions it does not seem you can challenge their advice at the same level as them. That leaves you at a disadvantage unfortunately. Good luck.


Well for one, and this is my own observation, you could have saved yourself all that stitching around the 5V rail if you extended the PCB under the boxed headers and ran 5V around the edge of the board and under the boxed headers. So you've compromised this layer for no good reason.

Regards me being at a disadvantage, at the end of the day I am a user of eurorack systems and in this area I'd say I have a lot more experience than you, Paul and my engineers combined. The reason I originally took interest in eurorack busboards is because I was unhappy as a user with the solutions available at the time. I challenge my engineers advice at every level as I am challenging you. I have put forward three points that essentially render your lengthy white paper useless as far as the end user is concerned. You have not substantiated your claims regarding low impedance vs low resistance (because apparently you are unable to remove the onboard caps) and how this results in an audible improvement, you've not given us any info on the busboards you tested against (you know there is more to busboard design than copper thickness ffs) and you've not compared to the vast majority of busboards that people are actually using (active busboards). I would say the fact that neither of you evidently use eurorack systems is at your disadvantage.

Just because you have backed up your claims with 'evidence' does not oblige anyone else to do so, especially given the nature of the instrument and like you said, the 1000's of hours it would take to prove your solution was in fact superior. If you want to spend 100's of hours testing against passive busboards (well known to be generally terrible by design) that's up to you.

EDIT: typos/added comments
paults
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
There is nothing missing or there by accident on LIBB. Anyone who believes they can do a better solution - do it and test the hell out of it and provide the results to the market.

The thing about EE engineering advice is you have to know when it is wrong. I often hear wrong advice from experienced engineers because they start with wrong assumptions. With all your questions it does not seem you can challenge their advice at the same level as them. That leaves you at a disadvantage unfortunately. Good luck.


Well for one, and this is my own observation, you could have saved yourself all that stitching around the 5V rail if you extended the PCB under the boxed headers and ran 5V around the edge of the board and under the boxed headers. So you've compromised this layer for no good reason.

Regards me being at a disadvantage, at the end of the day I am a user of eurorack systems and in this area I'd say I have a lot more experience than you, Paul and my engineers combined. The reason I originally took interest in eurorack busboards is because I was unhappy as a user with the solutions available at the time. I challenge my engineers advice at every level as I am challenging you. I have put forward three points that essentially render your lengthy white paper useless as far as the end user is concerned. You have not substantiated your claims regarding low impedance vs low resistance (because apparently you are unable to remove the onboard caps) and how this results in an audible improvement, you've not given us any info on the busboards you tested against (you know there is more to busboard design than copper thickness ffs) and you've not compared to the vast majority of busboards that people are actually using (active busboards). I would say the fact that neither of you evidently use eurorack systems is at your disadvantage.

Just because you have backed up your claims with 'evidence' does not oblige anyone else to do so, especially given the nature of the instrument and like you said, the 1000's of hours it would take to prove your solution was in fact superior. If you want to spend 100's of hours testing against passive busboards (well known to be generally terrible by design) that's up to you.

EDIT: typos/added comments


Ian,

Go ahead and design your bus board for Amalgamod any way you want. All your concerns have been addressed but you choose not to accept them. That's your choice too. I am not going to keep repeating the answers.

FWIW, I am a heavy synth and modular user since 1980, not just an EE practicing my skills for kicks.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Conjure
This thread is just chock full of butt hurt competition. It's pretty sad to read.
meatbeatz
FYI I have no intention of selling PSU/busboards separately to my cases so there is no competition here. I appreciate the work that has gone into LIBB and I'd most definitely recommend it to anyone looking for a passive busboard.

As far as LIBB being the quietest eurorack power solution available (with recommended PSUs) as has been broadcast all over facebook, that remains to be proven and as such I feel there is a fair deal of disingenuity here. Eg Paul claims LIBB to be superior to Hinton Busbars without testing while trumpeting "measurements over claims". If it weren't for me needing a schoolin and being at a supposed disadvantage, this discussion would've unfolded very differently. That's all from me.
Joe.
Conjure wrote:
This thread is just chock full of butt hurt competition. It's pretty sad to read.


I think the most poignant post in this thread is this:

Quote:
I have no more faith in manufacturers than in magazines.


For some reason over the years manufacturers developed a culture on here of being as unprofessional as possible, as 'used-car salesmen' as possible.

While some have popped into DIY power threads to give advice, when it comes to be open and honest about the real performance of their systems they attack each other, rather than simply provide the data everyone wants.

I'd rather use some shrouded headers soldered to 3 straightened paper-clips, than buy power products from any manufacturers on this board.
paults
I'm curious why you think the data we presented as being unprofessional?

We actually have gone out of our way NOT to "attack anyone", no 'naming names', no table full of "aggressor" modules.

I think as a whole the Euro users want to be in some sort of 'walled garden' where typical marketing/commerce does not occur. Call it 'non-commercial' if you will.

Euro is probably a $15million/year biz overall, and yet it's supposed to fly under the radar? Really?

Addressing the use of the term "best": I can speak from experience that this is a trigger word for a LOT of people. There is like a de facto understanding nothing can be the best, no manufacturer can claim such-and-such is the "best". So if people got their panties in a wad because John used the wordthatshallnotbeuttered, just [eyeroll] but that's no reason to immediately discount the data because of "best" the wording should be "lowest impedance passive bussboard currently available".

Lastly: this is going to "sound arrogant and stupid" to non-EEs, but I suspect the non-EEs with read it and say "that's Paul being arrogant and stupid [again]", so here goes. I don't HAVE to test Hinton's solution to know the LiBB has better performance when using switchers as the power source.

I'll just leave that there.
Joe.
paults wrote:
the wording should be "lowest impedance passive bussboard currently available"


And then under that comment should be a little graph or table, showing data for every passive busboard currently available. It would list each board's measured impedance, taken with the same set of calibrated tools.

But that would be the honest approach wouldn't it?
paults
Epilogue

I grew up during the glory years of stereo wars. Pioneer vs Technics vs Marantz. It was all watts/ch and THD.

Now, watts/ch is a measurement that's really not disputed. Either it does it or not. But THD.....hmm.....what does that even MEAN? If Pioneer has 0.175% THD in the phono preamp, and Technics has 0.15% THD, can I HEAR that? I know "lower is better", but to what end? What if Marantz won a 'blind' test of all 3, and their phono amp had 0.35% THD?

When it comes to something most people have ZERO technical background in (power), it's a "tough sell" because really all you can (as we have done), is to point out RELATIVE merit. Having FFTs/scope shots/etc is geeky and fun and all that, but what does an absolute measurement of the RMS noise in a certain bandwidth mean? Can I HEAR such-and-such noise? How does the "empty case" measurement (just the supply + bussboard, no modules loaded) compare to having 3 rows of 104HP loaded up with 12 different manufacturers?

So, since there really ISN'T so "hard stop" metric that universally applies, all we CAN say is what we ONLY say: compared to the things we list, in the test setup we used, significant improvement was seen in ALL use cases.

We have purposefully steered clear of wild claims like "fixes all your Euro VCA bleeding issues" because yes, there are many variables that come into play. But on the other hand, the LIBB is a huge step forward in addressing the issue.

If the Euro manufacturers together, as a whole, continue to whistle in the dark about the Euro power problems, it WILL kill it off or at the very least restrict much more growth. Who knows, maybe it will revert to Doepfer and people Googling every schematic on the web for a new DIY board to offer?
paults
Quote:
And then under that comment should be a little graph or table, showing data for every passive busboard currently available. It would list each board's measured impedance, taken with the same set of calibrated tools.

But that would be the honest approach wouldn't it?


No, it's called SLAGGING and shunned by the Euro "community". No names can be used.
mskala
LoFi Junglist wrote:
I think the most poignant post in this thread is this:

Quote:
I have no more faith in manufacturers than in magazines.


For some reason over the years manufacturers developed a culture on here of being as unprofessional as possible, as 'used-car salesmen' as possible.


Don't misunderstand that. It was meant in a very VERY specific context: the context of published technical comparison tests between different manufacturers' products. Those tests should not come from the manufacturers involved, themselves; or at the very least, manufacturers should not be considered obligated to do them. They are the wrong people for the job. We should be looking for independent sources to do objective comparisons.

Manufacturers who do public comparisons between their own products and others have an automatic, structural conflict of interest. Bias is unavoidable. That doesn't mean manufacturers are dishonest; it only means they are not the people who should be publishing comparison tests. No amount of experience or expensive test equipment will change the necessity of independence.

And when I say manufacturers cannot do public comparisons well because they are not independent, it doesn't mean they lack experience or expensive test equipment, nor that other parties have more. It only means manufacturers are not independent. Taking it as a comment on experience, on test equipment, or on honesty, is missing the point. Independence is what matters.
Joe.
mskala wrote:
Bias is unavoidable.


No, it's not a survey, and data from a DSO is not an opinion.

A comparative test with the same tool is not biased, the tool just displays facts. You publish those facts, and create an informed public.

If you modify the facts you've committed fraud. If you claim the data is fraudulent without providing proof, you are committing Libel. There's protection for both consumers and producers.

Relying on a boogyman/strawman to avoid testing, its just one more tool for producers who are avoiding facts from getting in the way of peddling gear.
mskala
Bias is not the same thing as dishonesty.

Among other things, there's an issue of knowing what to measure. Test your own product and you will naturally measure the things about it that are important to you; and since those things were the priorities when you built it, of course it'll be built to perform well on those tests and it's going to look good and really be good on those tests. The results are true. No dishonesty, no fraud, no libel. But they're biased because of where they came from.

And then a user, or an independent lab, thinks of something else to measure that is important to someone but wasn't what the manufacturer thought of to test, and they test that... and get a different comparison result. We've already seen that right here in this thread with the manufacturer publishing tests and people chiming in with "Yes but how about testing this other parameter?" It is not reasonable to expect manufacturers do customized tests for everybody on demand. Publishing tests is not the manufacturer's responsibility and they're not able to do the best job on it. We should demand independent testing by third parties.

Although "self-certification" exists, there's a reason that government-required tests for things like EMI are often required to be done by independent labs. And that reason isn't because the manufacturers' own labs or staff are lacking in equipment and experience, and (although fraud on compliance testing certainly exists) it's not really just about honesty either.
GenusModu
LoFi Junglist wrote:
paults wrote:
the wording should be "lowest impedance passive bussboard currently available"


And then under that comment should be a little graph or table, showing data for every passive busboard currently available. It would list each board's measured impedance, taken with the same set of calibrated tools.

But that would be the honest approach wouldn't it?


Lofi,

There are at least half a dozen reasons why the market's bus boards cannot be lower noise. A simple image inspection is easy enough to do and determine why they cannot be lower noise. That is not being dishonest or arrogant, it is simply called engineering experience. Unfortunately that is tough for the non-engineering types to understand. It is beyond my ability to explain the total engineering design concepts to every level of audience so they can understand that too. This "boil the ocean" approach of testing every 1 ounce bus board because it might have some "magic" that makes it better is evidence of the lack of understanding. I've tried to educate as best I can.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
paults
Quote:
Among other things, there's an issue of knowing what to measure. Test your own product and you will naturally measure the things about it that are important to you; and since those things were the priorities when you built it, of course it'll be built to perform well on those tests and it's going to look good and really be good on those tests. The results are true. No dishonesty, no fraud, no libel. But they're biased because of where they came from.


So by your logic, all 1,775 Euro manufacturers cannot measure the current consumption with their $19 Chinese DVM and put it on modulargrid? Just who exactly is supposed to do this?

So, all the pro audio gear with published specs (by the manufacturer) is invalid? I can't trust SSL or Avalon for specs?

Well. let's all agree this dead horse has been beat enough.
guestt
Mungo
LoFi Junglist wrote:
mskala wrote:
Bias is unavoidable.


No, it's not a survey, and data from a DSO is not an opinion.

A comparative test with the same tool is not biased, the tool just displays facts. You publish those facts, and create an informed public.
As you go on to discuss there are single measurement examples shown in "scope" images which are illustrative but not reliable data. Randomly taking a segment of the same length from each recording would likely show the differences but its a probability, there exists the possibility that they aren't representative or could have been chosen by the writer to show their point of view. The classic example is taking a photo of a city road, if a person waits for the right moment they can get a photo of the road completely congested or completely empty depending on what they want to illustrate. If they took it at a random time it could be anywhere between those extremes, and comparison between different cities based on a small number of photos taken at random times would be disingenuous.

But... there is a wealth of other longer time scale data presented for the product which is of high value in making comparisons, above and beyond what anyone else is providing with their products. Measurements are great but they need to be interpreted carefully and not just taken as perfect/exact representations.
paults
Because John & I are known scammers, this is of course our intention. Rats, busted (again). Back to the drawing board. SynthTech is fake, I'm really a bot in Belarus and no way John has worked over 30+ years at Qualcomm & Dell designing power systems for servers (besides designing keyboards at Kurzweil), he's actually a 14yr old in Taiwan taking a StarCraft break.
IvanC
So the moral of this story is:

Don't ever bother trying to show actual measurements or present technical information. People will be outraged and you'll be cursed for your dedication and work.

No good dead goes unpunished. Don't you dare try to educate a market about possible issues with the way things have been traditionally done. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm all out of trite sayings...

Carry on.
BugBrand
John, I'm curious about one thing.

I read that you have a full 2oz layer for the +12V and -12V rails - clearly a large area.
But is there any sort of bottle-neck around the actual input (or output) connector? I know that different connectors will have different contact resistances, but curious if the physical joint of the connector to the power plane has, effectively, negligible resistance (or is that part of the whole contact resistance measurement?). I see, for example, that you have two connections for 0V.

Not commenting on the general argy-bargy ball swings!

I find power threads interesting technically.
Paul saying about HiFi wars - as someone who likes having a nice(ish) hifi but isn't deep into such things, perhaps this shows that some people get super deep, but for many people it is simply a case of reading up a bit and actually getting on to making a decision. Like balancing the opportunity cost of reading up for ages looking for 'the perfect'. Not quite sure what I'm saying, but, I think many people want good solutions without having to delve super deep - so, yeah, guess LIBB should go down well.
MarcelP
paults wrote:


So, all the pro audio gear with published specs (by the manufacturer) is invalid? I can't trust SSL or Avalon for specs?



Much as one would like to trust companies with; many years of experience, in depth specialised knowledge and a command of the technology utilised in their field, the belief and faith in manufacturer claims isn't helped by the likes of VW and the emissions debacle. Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) public scepticism rapidly becomes the default.
GenusModu
paults wrote:
... John has worked over 30+ years at Qualcomm & Dell designing power systems for servers (besides designing keyboards at Kurzweil),...


I wouldn't call myself a power system designer. Rather I've picked up a smattering of skills in the power area while working on the total server designs, that could then be applied to modular synth power bus distribution.

John
GenusModu
BugBrand wrote:
John, I'm curious about one thing.

I read that you have a full 2oz layer for the +12V and -12V rails - clearly a large area.
But is there any sort of bottle-neck around the actual input (or output) connector? I know that different connectors will have different contact resistances, but curious if the physical joint of the connector to the power plane has, effectively, negligible resistance (or is that part of the whole contact resistance measurement?). I see, for example, that you have two connections for 0V.


There is resistance for everything in the path from the pads to the solder to the brass pins and screw terminals for the barrier strip. You can see the connector resistance by subtracting the board plus main power connector from the board only resistance. I would say that LIBB is approaching the point where the connector becomes a bottleneck, but isn't quite there yet.
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:
As you go on to discuss there are single measurement examples shown in "scope" images which are illustrative but not reliable data. Randomly taking a segment of the same length from each recording would likely show the differences but its a probability, there exists the possibility that they aren't representative or could have been chosen by the writer to show their point of view. The classic example is taking a photo of a city road, if a person waits for the right moment they can get a photo of the road completely congested or completely empty depending on what they want to illustrate. If they took it at a random time it could be anywhere between those extremes, and comparison between different cities based on a small number of photos taken at random times would be disingenuous.

But... there is a wealth of other longer time scale data presented for the product which is of high value in making comparisons, above and beyond what anyone else is providing with their products. Measurements are great but they need to be interpreted carefully and not just taken as perfect/exact representations.


There was not much variation in the noise data I collected over any time scale beyond a few seconds. It was close to steady state.
GenusModu
GenusModu wrote:
BugBrand wrote:
John, I'm curious about one thing.

I read that you have a full 2oz layer for the +12V and -12V rails - clearly a large area.
But is there any sort of bottle-neck around the actual input (or output) connector? I know that different connectors will have different contact resistances, but curious if the physical joint of the connector to the power plane has, effectively, negligible resistance (or is that part of the whole contact resistance measurement?). I see, for example, that you have two connections for 0V.


There is resistance for everything in the path from the pads to the solder to the brass pins and screw terminals for the barrier strip. You can see the connector resistance by subtracting the board plus main power connector from the board only resistance. I would say that LIBB is approaching the point where the connector becomes a bottleneck, but isn't quite there yet.


Let me elaborate a bit more. Just 12 inches of a single 12 AWG wire is 1.45 milliohm. LIBB's +12V worst case path is 1.87 milliohm including the power connector. They are pretty well matched. If you want even lower resistance, then you have to improve everything. The pertinent question would be, will you see or hear a difference in the audio, or is it approaching the limits of possible improvement through brute force resistance?
Multi Grooves
LoFi Junglist wrote:
paults wrote:
the wording should be "lowest impedance passive bussboard currently available"


And then under that comment should be a little graph or table, showing data for every passive busboard currently available. It would list each board's measured impedance, taken with the same set of calibrated tools.

But that would be the honest approach wouldn't it?



Is it not possible for all of the power solution manufacturers to agree to say, five or ten points of reference which everything on the market can can be referenced against for comparison and help de-mystify power for the end user? You can add what ever extras you feel your solution has in addition e.g. copper trace girth
flts
I was going to take part of the discussion earlier on because the whole thing seemed interesting. Forgot to do that, and probably for the best - at this point I'll just have to quote a friend of mine:

"Internet was a good idea. Such a shame it failed"
Multi Grooves
Did it really fail or did it just underline our deep flaws as a species?
Rex Coil 7
Bus bars all the way. Matched with proper attention paid to grounding, zero volt issues, and a solid linear power supply, they're the apex of power distribution systems.



Everything else is "also ran" competition.

cool
bobbylandry
IvanC wrote:
So the moral of this story is:

Don't ever bother trying to show actual measurements or present technical information. People will be outraged and you'll be cursed for your dedication and work.

No good dead goes unpunished. Don't you dare try to educate a market about possible issues with the way things have been traditionally done. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm all out of trite sayings...

Carry on.


I'm not sure how that ends up the takeaway from all this. Some of the talk from the makers of this bus board seems to have an attitude of dismissiveness to every other product developers "dedication and work" as well as saying implicitly and sometimes explicitly both that those who make eurorack gear are all too stupid or lazy to do it right and that the consumers are too stupid to realize it.

Maybe this product really is that much better, and maybe they had done a "good deed" by offering this product to us all and showing us that everything else we have bought and every product by every other manufacturer is wrong. I don't know enough about the technical side to have an opinion on this even with all the data in the world to back it up.

When most non technical people see data backing up a claim like this is isn't entirely the data itself that is convincing but the trust we have the data presented means we will be getting a better product. For me personally, after having read this thread and seeing the attitude in some of the comments of those behind the product, I don't have that trust. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm sure I'm not the only one. Everyone is free to act however they want and I have no desire to tell anyone what kind of person they should be, but the reason people aren't embracing this "good deed" isn't outrage or ignorance but rather not liking, among other things, being either made to feel or called "ignorant" by people trying to sell us their product.
GenusModu
bobbylandry wrote:
IvanC wrote:
So the moral of this story is:

Don't ever bother trying to show actual measurements or present technical information. People will be outraged and you'll be cursed for your dedication and work.

No good dead goes unpunished. Don't you dare try to educate a market about possible issues with the way things have been traditionally done. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm all out of trite sayings...

Carry on.


I'm not sure how that ends up the takeaway from all this. Some of the talk from the makers of this bus board seems to have an attitude of dismissiveness to every other product developers "dedication and work" as well as saying implicitly and sometimes explicitly both that those who make eurorack gear are all too stupid or lazy to do it right and that the consumers are too stupid to realize it.

Maybe this product really is that much better, and maybe they had done a "good deed" by offering this product to us all and showing us that everything else we have bought and every product by every other manufacturer is wrong. I don't know enough about the technical side to have an opinion on this even with all the data in the world to back it up.

When most non technical people see data backing up a claim like this is isn't entirely the data itself that is convincing but the trust we have the data presented means we will be getting a better product. For me personally, after having read this thread and seeing the attitude in some of the comments of those behind the product, I don't have that trust. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm sure I'm not the only one. Everyone is free to act however they want and I have no desire to tell anyone what kind of person they should be, but the reason people aren't embracing this "good deed" isn't outrage or ignorance but rather not liking, among other things, being either made to feel or called "ignorant" by people trying to sell us their product.


bobbylandry,

"too stupid"
"too lazy"
"called ignorant"

I am the maker of LIBB. I have never said those words.

In fact I framed the entire white paper as one where people can make their own choice. Everyone may not need or want LIBB. I've provided the data and the choice of a better solution. I fully expect that many people will be happy with the solution they already have. That's not the market for LIBB. It is for people who are not happy with their current solution, and who get no technical information on why there is even a difference between solutions.

I will defend the technical merits of the white paper. I believe that is fair. If there are specific areas that are not clear, point them out to me and I will see how they can be improved.

If technical data cannot convince you of trust, then what can? That is an honest question.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
BugBrand
I'll chip in and say that Bobby's comment seems like some interesting and useful layman's feedback. Sure you, John, didn't say those things (could be Paul S's comments perhaps? ..I'm not going to re-read the thread to find out!), but if he comes away with this feeling then it is worth thinking about.

(could be something engineer vs artist based)
bobbylandry
GenusModu wrote:
bobbylandry wrote:
IvanC wrote:
So the moral of this story is:

Don't ever bother trying to show actual measurements or present technical information. People will be outraged and you'll be cursed for your dedication and work.

No good dead goes unpunished. Don't you dare try to educate a market about possible issues with the way things have been traditionally done. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm all out of trite sayings...

Carry on.


I'm not sure how that ends up the takeaway from all this. Some of the talk from the makers of this bus board seems to have an attitude of dismissiveness to every other product developers "dedication and work" as well as saying implicitly and sometimes explicitly both that those who make eurorack gear are all too stupid or lazy to do it right and that the consumers are too stupid to realize it.

Maybe this product really is that much better, and maybe they had done a "good deed" by offering this product to us all and showing us that everything else we have bought and every product by every other manufacturer is wrong. I don't know enough about the technical side to have an opinion on this even with all the data in the world to back it up.

When most non technical people see data backing up a claim like this is isn't entirely the data itself that is convincing but the trust we have the data presented means we will be getting a better product. For me personally, after having read this thread and seeing the attitude in some of the comments of those behind the product, I don't have that trust. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm sure I'm not the only one. Everyone is free to act however they want and I have no desire to tell anyone what kind of person they should be, but the reason people aren't embracing this "good deed" isn't outrage or ignorance but rather not liking, among other things, being either made to feel or called "ignorant" by people trying to sell us their product.


bobbylandry,

"too stupid"
"too lazy"
"called ignorant"

I am the maker of LIBB. I have never said those words.

In fact I framed the entire white paper as one where people can make their own choice. Everyone may not need or want LIBB. I've provided the data and the choice of a better solution. I fully expect that many people will be happy with the solution they already have. That's not the market for LIBB. It is for people who are not happy with their current solution, and who get no technical information on why there is even a difference between solutions.

I will defend the technical merits of the white paper. I believe that is fair. If there are specific areas that are not clear, point them out to me and I will see how they can be improved.

If technical data cannot convince you of trust, then what can? That is an honest question.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Hey John, you've stuck to technical talk for sure, though you have been somewhat dismissive of some people's concerns in this thread. No personal judgement either way there.

The "too stupid" and "too lazy" were implicit in a lot of the attitude of whoever paults is. Are they not associated with you at all? The "ignorant" part was something whoever I quoted said. Are they not associated with you at all?

On the question of technical data, I studied electrical engineering which puts me slightly above most people's knowledge on the topic, but that still does not make me qualified to judge the vast majority of technical questions here whether I think it does or not. Especially not over others who have years of experience working with the things in question.

Showing someone a bunch of numbers and saying "this is better" then being asked why those numbers make it better and saying "because the numbers say it's better" definitely doesn't get ME all the way there, though. What does make me question the technical details is that I have read some well reasoned questions here about the product that have been addressed either defensively or dismissively.

Seriously though does paults have anything to do with you? Cause they're not doing you any favors.
radiokoala
No one is calling anyone ignorant, when John is saying "It is beyond [his] ability to explain the total engineering design concepts to every level of audience so they can understand that too", he means exactly that. Other than that, all questions & concerns have been addressed, it's been very transparent on honest on their part.

The whole "attitude of dismissiveness" thing is a little far-fetched, if paults & co. indeed were "saying other eurorack gear makers are stupid and lazy and wrong", there would be no reason for the likes of Rabid Elephant & Mungo to compliment the design in this thread, or recommend the busboard to their customers.

Most of paults posts BTW are some kind of snarky remarks, at the same time he's one of the few manufacturers with the highest happiness-to-dismay ratio (ever seen a single SynthTech blame topic? me too) — I'd rather that than über-polite corporate slug in unctuous tone telling you are not subject to free repair or dozen other eurorack manufacturers who leave you drowning without proper or prompt technical support.

I'm 100% positive these are the people that will stand behind their product and provide excellent aftersales without resorting to dubious claims and faux promises. You can have a different opinion and / or not trust them based on a reply to another person with some absurd quibblings, well that's OK: I also do not buy some modules because I do not like manufacturer's eyebrow shape or as a customer feel entitled to be shown a better-shaved chest than that of their demonstrator in NAMM Youtube clip. We, eurorack people, are a spoiled crowd with indefeasible privelege of being offended too easily by too little, it is what makes us us and can never go, or our Better Halves would see it is not the same guy they married and fell in love with. Let's not repair what isn't broken. Hug
bobbylandry
radiokoala wrote:
No one is calling anyone ignorant, when John is saying "It is beyond [his] ability to explain the total engineering design concepts to every level of audience so they can understand that too", he means exactly that. Other than that, all questions & concerns have been addressed, it's been very transparent on honest on their part.

The whole "attitude of dismissiveness" thing is a little far-fetched, if paults & co. indeed were "saying other eurorack gear makers are stupid and lazy and wrong", there would be no reason for the likes of Rabid Elephant & Mungo to compliment the design in this thread, or recommend the busboard to their customers.

Most of paults posts BTW are some kind of snarky remarks, at the same time he's one of the few manufacturers with the highest happiness-to-dismay ratio (ever seen a single SynthTech blame topic? me too) — I'd rather that than über-polite corporate slug in unctuous tone telling you are not subject to free repair or dozen other eurorack manufacturers who leave you drowning without proper or prompt technical support.

I'm 100% positive these are the people that will stand behind their product and provide excellent aftersales without resorting to dubious claims and faux promises. You can have a different opinion and / or not trust them based on a reply to another person with some absurd quibblings, well that's OK: I also do not buy some modules because I do not like manufacturer's eyebrow shape or as a customer feel entitled to be shown a better-shaved chest than that of their demonstrator in NAMM Youtube clip. We, eurorack people, are a spoiled crowd with indefeasible privelege of being offended too easily by too little, it is what makes us us and can never go, or our Better Halves would see it is not the same guy they married and fell in love with. Let's not repair what isn't broken. Hug


I'm certainly the one who has been pot stirring now with my last couple posts, but I'm fully with all that. My first comment here was cause someone DID make a sweeping statement about the ignorance of everyone and how we can't appreciate the good deed we've been done.
flts
OK, let's expand a bit on the one line disappointment I expressed above.

If you read the discussion through, from my viewpoint it basically amounts to the designer (John) and co-conspirator (Paul) trying to defend the fact that they chose to market John's product with measurements and reporting done using methods they chose, against at very least the following:

1) claiming the product or marketing is "snake oil" due to doing something most manufacturers neglect to do completely (eg. publish measurements) and doing them in a different way the writer would have preferred,

2) saying the results are not very honest or interesting because a modified version of the marketed product was not presented for comparison,

3) demanding the system to be compared to a handmade buss-bar system only available by custom order from a single person (or DIY, in which case all bets are off regarding construction quality), claiming the comparison is dishonest because that one was not included, and apparently claiming that the fact that the designer and co-conspirator are familiar with the electrical properties of that type of design and can tell something about its performance is just assuming things,

4) saying the comparison is not really useful or honest because it didn't name and shame the specific aggressor modules - even though that would no doubt have caused a huge shitstorm for "slagging the competitors",

5) saying the comparison and measurements are either somewhat useless or dishonest because they should have tested unspecified amount more of modules and power supplies (I assume ideally all of them out there, because the exact sufficient amount was not mentioned),

6) claiming the measurements and comparisons are not really useful or honest because the designer didn't name the specific bus boards compared against - even though that would no doubt have caused another shitstorm for "slagging the competitors",

7) saying that the measurements and comparisons are dishonest marketing because not every single widely available bus board product was included in the comparison and performance claims were made only based on representative types of competing products and domain knowledge (implying that relying on domain knowledge instead of a "brute force" approach is necessarily dishonesty),

8) claiming there is necessarily a bias in the measurements chosen for the report because the manufacturers have a bias for their own products (without apparently naming in which way the results would look to be biased),

9) leading from 8, expecting a manufacturer marketing a product to provide a report fulfilling the same criteria that one would expect from a neutral expert party conducting rigorous academic research (I admit this one I just read between the lines and it's very probable it's a straw man...),

10) claiming it's clear from the pictures / descriptions that the presented design could be improved electrically,

11) (wrongly) accusing the developer and the co-conspirator of being "just" engineers and not actual modular users and hence not understanding the requirements of modular users,

12) yet again claiming that it is not possible to make claims based on a representative set of measured things and domain knowledge, but that every single bus board and every single module + PSU configuration should be tested by brute force, otherwise it is dishonest marketing,

13) accusing of hiding relevant data

14) equating the fact that someone with decades of professional experience can generalize some things about electrical design without being able to explain it clearly in layman's words to... you can guess it... dishonesty about - again - making general claims without testing every single product marketed for the same purpose

I've omitted the sarcasm and vitriol from the list, and the parts that I found unclear (eg. about who people think the burden of proof is on in whichever cases). I haven't really omitted the positive comments or feedback because it pretty much only seems to appear as an aside to critique like "it is most probably a good product BUT".

IMHO it's pretty easy to see how the said people could get just a tiny bit annoyed and snarky that after doing the work of actually providing measurements as a part of marketing to those people who like to read and use those as a basis for making decisions (or just out of interest), the reply basically amounts to what I read as

"you should've just left out the measurements because people who use modulars don't understand them
"you didn't include enough data that I'd be convinced"
"you are being dishonest"
"you're biased but that's ok, it's probably still a decent product"
"here's how you could've made it better"
"your methodology is completely wrong"

And then

"why is your attitude so dismissive?"
"why are you being so snarky?"

Constructive critique I understand, but by now we've basically gone through the whole gamut of negative feedback for the fact that someone actually dared to make professional measurements for at least a couple of representative cases of using his product, and used those to build more thorough and well-founded marketing material than your average manufacturer of similar products (no, I'm not going to name or go through them all, sorry).

Which is why I was reminded of the friend's comment about Internet being a nice idea that failed.
BTG
What flts said.

I think the fundamental failure is that they published a very in depth whitepaper which provides a huge area of nit picking. If you want to criticize them then it's trivial to do so because they provide a ton of material to do so.

Contrast this with vendors that release things that they claim are better with some vague hand waving, but don't provide nearly enough data to be taken to task for. Rarely do people come into those threads and tear them apart because they have nothing to argue against short of buying the product and testing it themselves.

LIBB looks interesting and I wish the critics would offer constructive feedback instead of a bunch of passive aggressive "questions".
dysonant
flts
Best TL;DR post ever. Way too sum it up and clarify. applause
glennfin
I have a fairly large system. I'm using a combination of Doepfer and clicks and clocks backplanes. Some are daisy chained, some parallel fed. All fed from linear 15 amp +/- 12v supplies. Never had a problem with any kind of "noise". That being said, As my system grows bigger and bigger eek! I plan on upgrading power distribution to buss bars, as shown in this photo...

I figured, if I'm going to upgrade, might as well go all the way. cool

As I read further into this thread I said to myself... "what? no comment from Mr. Hinton???" hihi hihi

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Bus bars all the way. Matched with proper attention paid to grounding, zero volt issues, and a solid linear power supply, they're the apex of power distribution systems.



Everything else is "also ran" competition.

cool
Matos
fLTS nailed it. Thanks for being awesome.
flts
BTG wrote:
I think the fundamental failure is that they published a very in depth whitepaper which provides a huge area of nit picking. If you want to criticize them then it's trivial to do so because they provide a ton of material to do so.


Yeah, as far as I understand the major complaints, the main problem is that the article here is relatively "deep but focused". With that approach you inevitably either spend a "lifetime" doing research (= academia, Ph.D. thesis work, etc., not a single person boutique business that has to have the time to actually design and sell stuff), or fix several variables, choose "representative" products so you can do in-depth measurements and analysis, and trust your domain expertise to be able to generalise something from the chosen representative products and their measurements.

Whereas what most people would apparently rather want is a "wide and shallow" comparison, where the time was spent comparing a metric boatload of different bus boards, combined with several different power supplies, and a big bunch of different named sets of modules (say, a couple of hundred different combinations altogether?), and the results would be presented as simple numbers / raw data that everyone would agree to be so generic and simple that it is a fair and non-biased representation of differences.

And then one could confirm without "TL;DR" that yes, the claim about this performance parameter being best in class is indeed justifiable, because out of sixty-seven bus boards tested (they just probably haven't tested this new sixty-eight one that looks same as the three dozen others, so I'll give them some slack) this does have the biggest number in that column. And now we don't have to trust that the guy designing, measuring and analyzing actually knows what he's doing and claiming and why - because even we wouldn't understand the justification for the claims, these numbers speak for themselves.

I think both of these approaches ("deep and focused" and "wide and shallow") do have their merits. It's understandable people are fond of raw numbers and statistics and want to validate claims by seeing those. However, the flipside is that a single person euro manufacturer won't probably be spending his time doing as thorough measurements of a couple of hundred different setups as John and Paul have done for a couple of representative ones. So instead you get stuff like "resistance from end to end" or "peak power rail noise in millivolts (at this and this band, total, whatever)". Which are again part of the same story but do not necessarily signify better or worse performance alone in a given system.

It just feels kind of sad that actually releasing "white paper" type deeper measurement and analysis article (compared to the standard of most manufacturers not having any data available whatsoever) to aid with marketing a product seems to cause your normal Internet type "boo, you're doing it wrong, I'm never buying a product from you" type outrage and sniping... instead of, say, "hey, thanks a lot, this looks very thorough - personally I'd like to see more comparative simple measurements, and I'm wondering if this bit in the paper means what it does or if you'd like to clarify it by presenting some more measurements".

(Cue someone else releasing a product backed with comparison data for a couple of dozen competing products, with a couple of simple numbers per product, and getting accused "by the community" for not going deep enough because those numbers mean nothing, AND being nasty and slandering towards the competition, because obviously selecting a different set of parameters would have been better, or one could have been civil enough not to name the worst performing products at all...)
meatbeatz
Ok, I'll respond as it seems some of this is directed toward me. Also to put things perspective some of my comments/questions carry over from discussion regarding LIBB with both John and Paul on Facebook.

flts wrote:
2) saying the results are not very honest or interesting because a modified version of the marketed product was not presented for comparison,


I'll just quote John's reply: "I'd like to do that test, but I have other tests that are higher priority". I said I'd be interested in the results with/without the caps as the caps are apparently in large part responsible for the improvement in test results over the other unspecified busboards. This would show us just how MUCH difference they make to the test results and that I feel this would be a more meaningful comparison to only mentioning copper thickness of competitor busboards. I did not mention dishonesty in relation to this so please keep your pants on.

flts wrote:
3) demanding the system to be compared to a handmade buss-bar system only available by custom order from a single person (or DIY, in which case all bets are off regarding construction quality), claiming the comparison is dishonest because that one was not included, and apparently claiming that the fact that the designer and co-conspirator are familiar with the electrical properties of that type of design and can tell something about its performance is just assuming things,


When someone on Facebook asked how they compare to Hinton busbars Paul said LIBB is better. So prove it! He wants the punter to read the white paper as definitive proof of LIBB's superiority over competitor busboards yet wants us to take his word on how it compares to a busbar system (without of course mentioning anything about the PSU driving it)?

flts wrote:
4) saying the comparison is not really useful or honest because it didn't name and shame the specific aggressor modules - even though that would no doubt have caused a huge shitstorm for "slagging the competitors",


I can't find your reference to this comment but I'll reply anyway. You can see which modules are in the test system on the white paper, no slagging neccesary. The white paper shows an extensive set of tests on a very limited range of modules. Not wanting to test/show a wider range of modules or a larger system out of fear of causing a shitstorm? mmmkay.

flts wrote:
6) claiming the measurements and comparisons are not really useful or honest because the designer didn't name the specific bus boards compared against - even though that would no doubt have caused another shitstorm for "slagging the competitors",


I was asking for more information on competitor busboards than copper thickness. Too much? Again, I feel this info is as important as the results themselves. Another case of: Trust the data and in the absence of data take my word for it.

flts wrote:
8) claiming there is necessarily a bias in the measurements chosen for the report because the manufacturers have a bias for their own products (without apparently naming in which way the results would look to be biased),


Not my comment but.. A specific choice of modules and choice of competitor busboards can both go a long way toward favorable outcomes. It's common sense.

flts wrote:
10) claiming it's clear from the pictures / descriptions that the presented design could be improved electrically,


Funny you should mention, that was John's response on Facebook regards my discontinued AGM104 when I pulled him up on his 'claim' of LIBB being the first low impedance busboard in eurorack. And believe it or not it is possible to look at a PCB and see how it could be improved.

flts wrote:
11) (wrongly) accusing the developer and the co-conspirator of being "just" engineers and not actual modular users and hence not understanding the requirements of modular users,


I said EURORACK users not modular users. And this was in response to being told I was at a disadvantage because I was not an EE and "the thing about EE engineering advice is you have to know when it is wrong".

I've worked with multiple EE's and I've sold 100's of powered cases over 5 years without a single complaint of noise via PSU or busboard from REAL WORLD USERS. I have taken part in the development of 7 eurorack busboards (Elby and Amalgamod) all of which were improvements on existing solutions but big boss EE with comparatively next to no experience with EURORACK systems say's I'm at a disadvantage. If you want to enter a new market swinging around a message to the effect of 'I'm the best, everyone else sux' then expect a little back and forth and try not to be defensive when someone with experience in the game raises a few valid points/questions. I usually try to leave these kind of threads alone but with the amount of hot air here and on FB I couldn't help myself.

John said all (3) of my questions had been answered but I chose not to listen. I got one answer re: with/without caps being on the todo list, thanks!

Re: comparing to active boards as most commonly used, I got "a comparison to powered bus boards was not provided as I was not providing a powered solution." Cool, then why the quote at the top of your web page is the (unattributed) quote “Quietest Eurorack bus board you can buy”??? Oh... you meant passive busboard!!

Re: why no more info on competitor passive busboards other than copper thickness?.. Obviously it's been decided that amongst the plethora of info in the white paper this is of no interest to punters when anyone who knows the first thing about modular power distro understands the importance of the type and position of PSU connectors and position of IDC headers. It's difficult to believe that two EE's of such high esteem could brush this basic info off as irrelevant.

flts wrote:
(I admit this one I just read between the lines and it's very probable it's a straw man...),


I would say that pretty much sums up the entirety of your post (and this thread). And FWIW I've had a number of engineers and manufacturers reach out via PM basically agreeing with everything I've said above. So back to your political point scoring.
Joe.
Do a study, release the Data.

Everything else is hype.
meatbeatz
LoFi Junglist wrote:
Do a study, release the Data.

Everything else is hype.


You keep asking for data. What data?

What measurements would convince you that a busboard is more effective than a paper clip?
Joe.
meatbeatz wrote:
What measurements would convince you that a busboard is more effective than a paper clip?


Here you go.

The fact you would ask that, that you would pretend not to know how to test the impedance of a piece of wire, is ridiculous and you should feel ashamed.

Quote:
I have taken part in the development of 7 eurorack busboards. . . all of which were improvements on existing solutions


And how would you know that there was improvements, if you didn't test them? If you didn't know how to collect data each time? meh

There can't be an A/B comparison of a PCB and a paperclip busboard, because all the paperclip manufactures would claim the tests were fraudulent, and there would be an 'inevitable shitstorm' like all those other (Zero) times a comparative test in Eurorack power has been released.
Rigo
meatbeatz wrote:
flts wrote:
3) demanding the system to be compared to a handmade buss-bar system only available by custom order from a single person (or DIY, in which case all bets are off regarding construction quality), claiming the comparison is dishonest because that one was not included, and apparently claiming that the fact that the designer and co-conspirator are familiar with the electrical properties of that type of design and can tell something about its performance is just assuming things,


When someone on Facebook asked how they compare to Hinton busbars Paul said LIBB is better. So prove it! He wants the punter to read the white paper as definitive proof of LIBB's superiority over competitor busboards yet wants us to take his word on how it compares to a busbar system (without of course mentioning anything about the PSU driving it)?


paults wrote:
Lastly: this is going to "sound arrogant and stupid" to non-EEs, but I suspect the non-EEs with read it and say "that's Paul being arrogant and stupid [again]", so here goes. I don't HAVE to test Hinton's solution to know the LiBB has better performance when using switchers as the power source..


Of course, why somebody aiming for the highest quality would use a switching PSU is another question whistlin'
meatbeatz
LoFi Junglist wrote:
meatbeatz wrote:
What measurements would convince you that a busboard is more effective than a paper clip?


Here you go.

The fact you would ask that, that you would pretend not to know how to test the impedance of a piece of wire, is ridiculous and you should feel ashamed.


Wow, bait thread of the year! Can I tell you to GFY or do I need to use the GFY emoticon? Can you google it for me? wink

The LIBB white paper has comparative impedance measurements but according to you they are only valid if GenusModu test every other busboard on the market. Make up your mind. Other than to puff your chest I'm not sure what your message is in this thread as you keep contradicting yourself. I was asking what specific data or measurements you want seeing you keep asking for them. Also under what test conditions, with what PSU's, if comparative then compared to what? Asking repeatedly for measurements means nothing.

Quote:
And how would you know that there was improvements, if you didn't test them? If you didn't know how to collect data each time? meh


I didn't test them?? Please, tell me more. If I ever need to explain the straw man fallacy I'm going to refer to this thread from now on.

LoFi Junglist wrote:
There can't be an A/B comparison of a PCB and a paperclip busboard, because all the paperclip manufactures would claim the tests were fraudulent, and there would be an 'inevitable shitstorm' like all those other (Zero) times a comparative test in Eurorack power has been released.


Who is claiming the tests are fraudulent?

I'm afraid if you want to continue we'll have to take it to the PM's as I can see you're slinging shit in the hope it'll stick and it's kind of embarrassing to have it out in public.
2disbetter
Rigo wrote:
paults wrote:
t;]I don't HAVE to test Hinton's solution to know the LiBB has better performance when using switchers as the power source..


Of course, why somebody aiming for the highest quality would use a switching PSU is another question whistlin'


Easy there. The best solution isn't always the practical solution. People who don't want the best solution because of practical reasons, but still don't want to settle for crap power systems need options.

Happily the LIBB fits very nicely there. This is a very good thing.

2d
Rigo
2disbetter wrote:
Rigo wrote:
paults wrote:
t;]I don't HAVE to test Hinton's solution to know the LiBB has better performance when using switchers as the power source..


Of course, why somebody aiming for the highest quality would use a switching PSU is another question whistlin'


Easy there. The best solution isn't always the practical solution. People who don't want the best solution because of practical reasons, but still don't want to settle for crap power systems need options.

Happily the LIBB fits very nicely there. This is a very good thing.

2d

Don't worry, I know that sometimes things like portability get in the way of optimal solutions.
Same with the "Oh no, this module is more than 3mm deep" comments hihi
flts
meatbeatz wrote:
Ok, I'll respond as it seems some of this is directed toward me.


Thank you, I was actually hoping some of the more active commenters would get back to this - otherwise I'd known better to keep my mouth shut or made my point in a less polemic way.

Quote:
Also to put things perspective some of my comments/questions carry over from discussion regarding LIBB with both John and Paul on Facebook.


I think that perspective should have been mentioned from the start. Someone participating in or reading this MW thread will no doubt interpret things very differently having seen the context which I'm now missing. Most people here don't know you, John or Paul, and what the relationship between you three is, even though it did seem between the lines that there has been previous debate about the subject between you.

Quote:
I'll just quote John's reply: "I'd like to do that test, but I have other tests that are higher priority". I said I'd be interested in the results with/without the caps as the caps are apparently in large part responsible for the improvement in test results over the other unspecified busboards. This would show us just how MUCH difference they make to the test results and that I feel this would be a more meaningful comparison to only mentioning copper thickness of competitor busboards. I did not mention dishonesty in relation to this so please keep your pants on.


Fair enough regarding the dishonesty, sorry. That was my incorrect interpretation because you eg. used "evidence" with quotes (implying it isn't really evidence at all) or the fact that you claim "vast majority of busboards" people are using are active (contrary to my experience, most people I know still use separate power supplies and passive bus boards) and testing against passive bus boards which are known to be terrible as a category is not what one should do.

I thought those things implied that the comparison was being dishonest because the measurements and chosen category were deliberately chosen to be favourable to the presented solution. Sorry for interpreting it in a wrong way.

Regarding how interesting the paper is, you pretty clearly said that not testing the same board without capacitors is one of the points that "essentially render your lengthy white paper useless as far as the end user is concerned" for the reason of "because apparently you are unable to remove the onboard caps" (eg. as far as I can interepret, repeating nth time in a sarcastic way that modifying a sold product to something it isn't would be needed for the results to make sense to the end user, and complaining that the manufacturer still hasn't done that).

So you're asking the manufacturer to prove that by modifying the product to an inferior version of itself, and when the manufacturer actually says it's among the tests he does want to perform and it's already been simulated but needs to be verified with measurements, and later goes on giving some interim measurements in the thread just to give an idea, you go on repeating that the white paper is flawed and the "evidence" presented is of no use ("Just because you have backed up your claims with 'evidence' does not oblige anyone else to do so").

I agree with you in general on the point that comparing a specific system to representative entries in their categories doesn't give any specific recommendations on how much better brand name x is than y. I'd say someone else with no horse in the race should/could do those kinds of comparative tests as well if the manufacturer doesn't have the time or interest to do it, or is afraid of being accused of being too hard on specific named competitors.

Plus I do understand you weren't convinced that the engineering experience of Paul and John would be solid enough to be able to extrapolate how close to each other eg. different 1 oz copper passive bus boards perform based on specimen they tested, or that they haven't given enough reason in the white paper to actually trust their judgement on this. Fair enough, that would warrant more technical explanations to convince you (or anyone who thinks the same).

Quote:
When someone on Facebook asked how they compare to Hinton busbars Paul said LIBB is better. So prove it! He wants the punter to read the white paper as definitive proof of LIBB's superiority over competitor busboards yet wants us to take his word on how it compares to a busbar system (without of course mentioning anything about the PSU driving it)?


I'm not sure what Paul actually claimed, except that LIBB is "lowest impedance" bus board generally available. Of course he isn't the one designing and selling the board, but is associated so closely with it and part of this discussion that your point is valid here.

In general, I would think that EEs with decades of experience in the specific fields would know the properties of solid copper bars and thick cable, being pretty classic methods of power distribution, and know what they do well and what they can't do well because, well - they're just copper bars with thick cable and the physical properties have been pretty well known for ages.

Measurements would give the claim more general credibility as always, but I do assume that the method of power distribution is so simple and "archaic" (both in good and bad), and the solution can't really be said to be widely or easily available (apparently being a completely custom system priced on request), that it's possible to say something about what it does well and what it doesn't simply based on the fact that it's a solid slab of copper - without actually ordering a custom system from mr. Hinton across the pond and making the same measurements.

What you say contains valid critique: Paul specifically mentions in the thread "I don't HAVE to test Hinton's solution to know the LiBB has better performance when using switchers as the power source" and gives a valid reason for that. I assume that implies the case is different with very clean linear power.

That would most probably need to be said aloud, I don't think that specific point was raised during the discussion, whether we're speaking about the general case or specific case of badly performing switching power supplies (which were not part of the white paper test setup). If he says LIBB is necessarily better performing with clean linear power, that would be entirely another claim.

(Btw. there is no comparative data from Hinton to support his solution either, only resistance measurements, but I assume he isn't simply marketing his solution as technically the best out there so he gets slack for that?)

Quote:
I can't find your reference to this comment but I'll reply anyway. You can see which modules are in the test system on the white paper, no slagging neccesary.


That's a very good point I hadn't noted - even though the white paper neglects to mention what the "aggressor" module is, it is pretty clear from the modulargrid image as it is the only one representative in its class.

Quote:
I was asking for more information on competitor busboards than copper thickness. Too much? Again, I feel this info is as important as the results themselves. Another case of: Trust the data and in the absence of data take my word for it.


I'm not disagreeing with you. I just thought it was estabilished that the manufacturer doesn't want to divulge that information of the fear of blaming another named manufacturers of bad products, considers the measurements made representative of the class, and suggests that others make similar measurements if in doubt.

It does imply that whoever reads the paper either trusts that the people making the measurements are both honest and experienced enough that the chosen measured do represent the actual differences and there are indeed different "performance classes" of passive bus boards depending on chosen variables. Or that if the reader has a doubt about the honesty or level of expertise of the said parties for some reason (eg. commercial interest), the reader may want to take the paper with a grain of salt or go elsewhere. There is still much to be learnt even if you don't trust the measurements make sense.

What I'm trying to say that suggestions on improvements are good discussion. This particular discussion just quickly started to read as a blame against people who dared to do measurements and dared to neglect to release all the data or test more and more specimen, instead of just humbly releasing a product with no marketing claims and no data to back it up. Was it some kind of communication breakdown? The parties not understanding each other? Engineering expertise and bold claims being a red flag to some? I don't know.

Quote:
Not my comment but.. A specific choice of modules and choice of competitor busboards can both go a long way toward favorable outcomes. It's common sense.


Yes, that is entirely possible.

It's still one of the dozen things that people complain about instead of a single welcoming and positive comment from pretty much of the start when the white paper was announced. That was the point of my whole list - people immediately start picking the paper and product apart, saying how things should have done better regarding the product and analysis, and speculating about various forms of incompetence and dishonesty that may be in play because not enough raw data, too many fixed variables and assumptions, not enough names mentioned.

Quote:
Funny you should mention, that was John's response on Facebook regards my discontinued AGM104 when I pulled him up on his 'claim' of LIBB being the first low impedance busboard in eurorack. And believe it or not it is possible to look at a PCB and see how it could be improved.


OK, so it was actually a retort on something that happened in a different context, I didn't know about that. In that case I'll let it pass, and just note, that it isn't probably something that will increase friendliness and mutual respect either way (the blame being on both parties here).

However, I do now understand that if you offered your product as an alternative to his, he (and the others) might get an idea that you are commenting as a direct competitor, even if you have discontinued that particular product and are not intending to produce any more bus boards.

Quote:
I said EURORACK users not modular users. And this was in response to being told I was at a disadvantage because I was not an EE and "the thing about EE engineering advice is you have to know when it is wrong".


I think that's actually a valid point both ways.

Being a long time Eurorack user doesn't give competence on measuring and evaluating power supply and busboard performance (more than "it works for me"). A lot of modular users don't really care shit about if they get studio quality SNR or not, whatever works works. And that's perfectly OK from user perspective.

Then again, being an EE doesn't really give experience on how good / bad solutions modular users are willing to accept in general, but it does give competence to build a better solution if an Eurorack user wants potentially better SNR and less interference than whatever the current employed solution is.

Quote:
I've worked with multiple EE's and I've sold 100's of powered cases over 5 years without a single complaint of noise via PSU or busboard from REAL WORLD USERS.


That is a good thing. It may mean your systems are top notch electrically, that they have a huge noise floor but the customers do not care about that in their specific environments as they aren't aiming for "studio level" SNR, or something else, though.

Note that this was not meant to be read as a retort or sarcasm. What I'm trying to say that I've built a couple of dozen cases with varying suboptimal power solutions involving off the shelf AC-DC switchers and my own design bus boards, and have yet to hear a SINGLE complaint. Does that mean I'm an EE? No. Does that mean my power solutions are good? No. It simply means they don't suck as much that people who've bought my cases would find it an issue.

"No complaints" is a different thing than "this is better / worse than that in these respects IF you actually care about that".

Quote:
I have taken part in the development of 7 eurorack busboards (Elby and Amalgamod) all of which were improvements on existing solutions but big boss EE with comparatively next to no experience with EURORACK systems say's I'm at a disadvantage.


I do not know how much experience John has with Eurorack systems, he isn't saying that, but I do know he's done power related design for MOTM systems before. Paul, in turn, has probably spent equal or more time with Eurorack with his SynthTech Euro modules that are some of the most worry-free and solid I've used in the Euro land. I'd trust his word on electrical design for Eurorack based on that over many, many others in the business.

In any case, are you claiming, that someone with a decade of experience using a specific modular format is in advantage regarding product design compared to someone with less experience using that format in practise, but decades of experience in the actual product design and different modular formats / modular and analog synths in general?

This is one of the arguments I simply don't understand so I'd appreciate a clearer explanation of why it matters or invalidates the point about EE experience.

Quote:
If you want to enter a new market swinging around a message to the effect of 'I'm the best, everyone else sux' then expect a little back and forth and try not to be defensive when someone with experience in the game raises a few valid points/questions. I usually try to leave these kind of threads alone but with the amount of hot air here and on FB I couldn't help myself.


OK, so you felt provocated by too brave or over the top marketing claims you didn't feel were substantiated, and that resulted in the tone of the voice of some of the discussion from your side. And, I assume, Paul and John felt provocated that John's product and their measurements were immediately called snake oil and invalid for about a dozen reasons, which probably resulted in the tone of the voice from the other side.

Quote:
John said all (3) of my questions had been answered but I chose not to listen. I got one answer re: with/without caps being on the todo list, thanks!


If he said all your questions had been answered but you feel they hadn't been addressed at all, perhaps it had been useful to ask him to point the answers and make them clearer to you. Maybe John thought he had addressed the questions but the way he did it wasn't clear, you failed to notice a point he'd made, or something entirely else.

I've found it's easy to get frustrated in internet because the actual communication doesn't work. Which is what most of this thread seems to be about now that you've explained your stance, and what most of internet discussion is. So instead of asking "to clarify, do you mean this", "I'm sure you have a good point there but can you expand on that" or "could you explain in a bit more detail, I didn't get a good idea of why this claim holds", it turns to "I want to know this!" "hey, here's an answer that doesn't cover what you're asking" "oh so you're deliverately avoiding things" "you're an idiot" type of discussion.

Again, my point was not that there haven't been any sensible points raised. My point was that the tone of the thread seems so hostile and mainly trying to poke holes, point errors and nitpick (not always nitpick!) about the white paper, the approach taken in the tests, or the product itself, that I'm not surprised some of the answers or Paul's comments are being quite terse and snarky as the tone of most of the commenters is pretty much that as well.

Quote:
Re: comparing to active boards as most commonly used, I got "a comparison to powered bus boards was not provided as I was not providing a powered solution." Cool, then why the quote at the top of your web page is the (unattributed) quote “Quietest Eurorack bus board you can buy”??? Oh... you meant passive busboard!!


Personally I'd say that is in the category of nit picking, as an "active bus board" is what is commonly called a "power supply". If you interpret it as hot air and false marketing then I do understand you feel angry about it.

Quote:
Re: why no more info on competitor passive busboards other than copper thickness?.. Obviously it's been decided that amongst the plethora of info in the white paper this is of no interest to punters when anyone who knows the first thing about modular power distro understands the importance of the type and position of PSU connectors and position of IDC headers. It's difficult to believe that two EE's of such high esteem could brush this basic info off as irrelevant.


The right follow-up question here would be "I don't understand - can you explain in detail, in technical terms if applicable, why you consider these factors irrelevant?"

Ie. instead of demanding to divulge what those boards are, what their specific topology is, and so on, it'd be interesting to know reasons why the particular unnamed boards were chosen as the representative ones, and if other boards weren't measured (in which case it would be interesting to see the variance), what is the technical explanation that other boards of eg. similar copper thickness can not perform noticeably better or worse.

I know John has said before in the thread that with his experience he can see directly that it's not possible that the competitors have done better the things that are the selling points of LIBB, and that the way the IDC connectors are organized doesn't make the performance any better than the tested representative units.

If that claim doesn't seem plausible, reading the paper doesn't give you enough answers why that is, and there is no clear explanation otherwise, then it's perfectly reasonable to ask for a highly technical explanation, and not to personally trust the claims or buy the product if none is given.

Then again, if there's no trust in the expertise of the designer to design a board, take a sensible set of comparative measurements and decide what set of variables, measurements and representative products makes sense, then I guess it's given that buying a premium priced product from someone whose expertise one doesn't trust doesn't make sense in the first place.

Quote:
I would say that pretty much sums up the entirety of your post (and this thread). And FWIW I've had a number of engineers and manufacturers reach out via PM basically agreeing with everything I've said above. So back to your political point scoring.


I am not disagreeing with many of your points raised, I'm disagreeing with the tone of voice of the comments that, to me, imply ill will instead of honest critique of the methods and an attempt to have a serious discussion, asking clarifying questions if necessary.

If it's just a matter of language barrier and both parties have been actually trying to have a civil and patient discussion with more fair questions asked when something hasn't been understood completely, then I'm sorry.

In any case, to confirm, basically you are saying I, and the people following this discussion, should be convinced that you are being right and I am being wrong and unreasonable, because you have had private contact from unspecified number of unspecified people that hold greater authority or credibility than I do - even though you are actually not in liberty to name them and what they have said, so I should just trust you on this?

(Edit: cleaned up some quotes above)
Roy72
This thread reminds me why I always hate getting stuck talking to engineers at parties.
flts
Roy72 wrote:
This thread reminds me why I always hate getting stuck talking to engineers at parties.


I'm lucky I don't go to parties anymore - it's actually more fun sitting at a bar listening to a drunk DSP engineer explaining about decorrelated quantization noise in old Lexicon reverb algorithms (that I still don't understand much about but find more entertaining than your average small talk).
Roy72
flts wrote:
Roy72 wrote:
This thread reminds me why I always hate getting stuck talking to engineers at parties.


I'm lucky I don't go to parties anymore - it's actually more fun sitting at a bar listening to a drunk DSP engineer explaining about decorrelated quantization noise in old Lexicon reverb algorithms (that I still don't understand much about but find more entertaining than your average small talk).


How often do you find they are interested in an opinion different to yours? Or maybe express some doubt their positivist constructs?
flts
meatbeatz wrote:
The LIBB white paper has comparative impedance measurements but according to you they are only valid if GenusModu test every other busboard on the market.


FWIW I think this is actually the biggest gripe I have with the "substance" of this discussion. Ie. not this specific complaint LJ is making and you're responding to, but the general fact that most of the critique here would be useless and void if only the standard was that manufacturers published any sensible measurements of their own products.

Now that they don't, the onus for proving that the competition is performing worse regarding seems to be on one company's side - whether the proposed solution is that they should test every single bus board in existence to prove they're better than this and this and this and this and this and this - or the critique is that they did not take into account this or that variable or bus board type so the comparison is too limited or simple to make any sense. Et cetera.
radiokoala
Personally, I wanted to comment that it is generally considered a poor taste on here when somebody who has a horce in the same race starts picking at things / details of a competing product. Usually you won't see a module manufacturer come into announcement thread of other company to critique the PCB design or like.

Taking part in development of 7 busboards is a good thing – a merit – and takes skill. Designing a low impedance busboard is something to benefit end users as well, regardless of whether it's a first product of its kind or best solution on the market; the result is people get access to more quality power supplies, and this is a good thing.

It would have been more constructive if one had applauded that and tried to discuss the further improvements to be made without taking things personally (John has not admitted Amalgamod product to be the first l.i.b.b) – this would have been more constructive. Releasing whitepapers is actually a step in the right direction, as far as collective benefits are considered, and actually Genus Modu aren't likely even the pioneers: I think it was Rabid Elephant that first published documents on how Eurorack power could be improved on his website, probably Mungo too.

What I'm saying (and it's a friendly advice for meatbeatz: I realize you didn't ask for it) is probably take it down a notch with the way you raise your questions, because for a casual observer it may look like you are trying to find faults in a competitor's product, all while promoting some of yours in their. This isn't doing you much favor.

And – you probably know, I generally have a sympathy towards you, and don't disagree with 99% of your posts, – but here I feel it's somewhat counter-constructive endeavor all in all, and some of the matters would be better off discussed via pm I feel. One could see it has already led to some people being turned off by Paul's replies to m.b like “illegitimate way of addressing customer's concerns” – whereas it wasn't really a customer-company interaction, rather "...three EE's come into a bar”. You know. razz

Cheers.
flts
Roy72 wrote:
How often do you find they are interested in an opinion different to yours? Or maybe express some doubt their positivist constructs?


Speaking about this particular case, being a close friend of mine... roughly as often as any other non-engineer person I know. Eg. depends heavily on the subject area discussed.
Rex Coil 7
I think that .. perhaps ... if we as a group knew the OP better there'd be less schoolyard fights within the thread. But bulldozing one's way into the front door and strongly asserting themselves amongst the membership in an effort to market something isn't in the Dale Carnegie "how to win friends and influence people" book.

That said .... does the following apply to the OP (especially since he/she only had SEVEN posts when this thread was posted by them)?... (quoting) "If you don't have 100 posts, you'll need to participate in the community a bit more so we will have a chance to get to know something about you before you can do business here. It's not hard. Post about music, gear, your cat, your garden, your favorite band.

If we see someone who has recently reached the 100 post threshold and is starting to create For Sale threads, we will often investigate their post history. If the vast majority are pointless bumping of postcount with single word posts etc, your account will be deleted without warning. You won't be banned, you'll be free to register and try again, but we will simply toast your account." (end quote).

https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34546

I'm not certain this set of rules applies here in this case, but it sure feels like it should. Loyalties and trust are earned, not bestowed.

Just a thought. cool
Rex Coil 7
glennfin wrote:
I have a fairly large system. I'm using a combination of Doepfer and clicks and clocks backplanes. Some are daisy chained, some parallel fed. All fed from linear 15 amp +/- 12v supplies. Never had a problem with any kind of "noise". That being said, As my system grows bigger and bigger eek! I plan on upgrading power distribution to buss bars, as shown in this photo...

I figured, if I'm going to upgrade, might as well go all the way. cool

As I read further into this thread I said to myself... "what? no comment from Mr. Hinton???" hihi hihi

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Bus bars all the way. Matched with proper attention paid to grounding, zero volt issues, and a solid linear power supply, they're the apex of power distribution systems.



Everything else is "also ran" competition.

cool
These aren't Hinton bus bars, I made them myself.
flts
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
I think that .. perhaps ... if we as a group knew the OP better there'd be less schoolyard fights within the thread. But bulldozing one's way into the front door and strongly asserting themselves amongst the membership in an effort to market something isn't in the Dale Carnegie "how to win friends and influence people" book.


I think Mr. Paul Schreiber of Synthesis Technology fame is a well established person on this forum, and as far as I can see, many of the schoolyard fights seem to have been caused by his less than diplomatic reactions and comments on the subject (edit: or rather, the interaction between some of the less diplomatic criticizers and him, no matter who has been right and who wrong in what...)
mskala
radiokoala wrote:
Personally, I wanted to comment that it is generally considered a poor taste on here when somebody who has a horse in the same race starts picking at things / details of a competing product. Usually you won't see a module manufacturer come into announcement thread of other company to critique the PCB design or like.


Well said. That's the point I intended to make, which got lost and ignored just because I dared to call one of the reasons for it by its true name.

Manufacturers are not the people who should be making public comparisons. Independent reviewers are. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with being a manufacturer or with *someone* doing public comparison tests; those two things are both good and both important. They just do not go together, because manufacturers have an automatic conflict of interest when they have a horse in the same race.
radiokoala
Rex Coil 7
It isn't For Sale thread, if one is careful to read through the rule you quote carefully, they will be able to get the idea of the applicability of the rule to the thread in question: note how it's called “Product Announcement Thread” and is located in Eurorack modules subforum, unlike those guilty sub-100 post sale advertisements in FST or somewhere.

I'm certain this set of rules doesn't apply here, nor it should.

BOOM!
flts
radiokoala,

Thanks for being a sensible person. I think both of your posts kind of underline what feels weird about the tone / vibe of the discussion for me as well.

I try my best to refrain from commenting about any online discussion that starts going to hell or escalating to "schoolyard fights", because I tend to get so mad at looking at the result, I usually end up acting no better, and end up arguing about the substance as well (eg. more fuel to the flames).

So apologies if I offended anyone, I'll try to be a nicer person in the future again.
glennfin
Yes, I figured they weren't Hinton's. Of course they look great!. I will make my own as well... if my wrist can hold out from all that drilling and tapping. woah woah

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
glennfin wrote:
I have a fairly large system. I'm using a combination of Doepfer and clicks and clocks backplanes. Some are daisy chained, some parallel fed. All fed from linear 15 amp +/- 12v supplies. Never had a problem with any kind of "noise". That being said, As my system grows bigger and bigger eek! I plan on upgrading power distribution to buss bars, as shown in this photo...

I figured, if I'm going to upgrade, might as well go all the way. cool

As I read further into this thread I said to myself... "what? no comment from Mr. Hinton???" hihi hihi

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Bus bars all the way. Matched with proper attention paid to grounding, zero volt issues, and a solid linear power supply, they're the apex of power distribution systems.



Everything else is "also ran" competition.

cool
These aren't Hinton bus bars, I made them myself.
guestt
radiokoala wrote:
What I'm saying (and it's a friendly advice for meatbeatz: I realize you didn't ask for it) is probably take it down a notch with the way you raise your questions, because for a casual observer it may look like you are trying to find faults in a competitor's product, all while promoting some of yours in their. This isn't doing you much favor..


Absolutely spot on - you have hit the nail on the head - and worse it's not the first time he's done this either!!

I gave the benefit of the doubt before but seeing this behaviour repeated again makes me realise this is nothing short of bullying.

I wish I could say it is isolated, but there are others in the Eurorack world who seem to think they are entitled and can push people around using these nasty techniques to discredit them and destroy their attempts at setting up a business.

I am absolutely not being over dramatic when I say it is industrial warfare.

I can't fucking stand bullies!
meatbeatz
Thanks flts for your considered response. I'm not the best at getting my point across so I can respect when someone can. I'll do my best in replying.

flts wrote:
I think that perspective should have been mentioned from the start.


You're right. I didn't however come in with the intention of nit picking it just kinda turned out that way.

flts wrote:
So you're asking the manufacturer to prove that by modifying the product to an inferior version of itself, and when the manufacturer actually says it's among the tests he does want to perform and it's already been simulated but needs to be verified with measurements, and later goes on giving some interim measurements in the thread just to give an idea, you go on repeating that the white paper is flawed and the "evidence" presented is of no use ("Just because you have backed up your claims with 'evidence' does not oblige anyone else to do so").


I think you might've conflated a couple of my comments but I can see how it would seem I refused to accept John's reply. Thanks for pointing this out (sorry John!). I found myself repeating my points when it was suggested I was at a disadvantage working with two EE and not being an EE myself and I took it as a subtle jab. He may be right I just don't like being spoken to like I washed up yesterday. Having said, it all seemed civil between us until Paul started upping the rhetoric.

Hypothetically, if someone built a busboard following the same design/concept at a quarter the size and with a quarter of the output sockets it would have lower impedance and perform better in the tests. It would then be better than LIBB. What about the same again but with 4 times the PCB size and amount of connectors? It wouldn't perform as well. Two important variables of which neither are taken into account. Without at least stating the number of connectors and the size of the PCB what good is a comparative test? Honestly I'm not even thinking too hard about it. I feel this is a question anyone should be able to ask without being made the villain.

Am I wrong in questioning the LIBB white paper is beyond refute in proving claims of it being the quietest busboard available and that the proof is in the data? I disagree with the idea that the onus is on other busboard manufacturers to do the same level of testing when the general claim of LIBB being the quietest busboard doesn't meet what I feel to be basic criteria when making comparative tests. Seriously, it's the first comparative busboard test but due to eurorack politics we aren't allowed know to what it's being compared to? I applaud John for raising the bar but a comparative test under such circumstances is seriously flawed imo and I won't be goaded into producing any such comparative testing.

flts wrote:
This particular discussion just quickly started to read as a blame against people who dared to do measurements and dared to neglect to release all the data or test more and more specimen, instead of just humbly releasing a product with no marketing claims and no data to back it up. Was it some kind of communication breakdown? The parties not understanding each other? Engineering expertise and bold claims being a red flag to some? I don't know.


A bit of all of the above I think. There were a few parties involved there and I can only take responsibility for my own part. I feel like coming in with criticism after the snake oil comment probably wasn't the best idea and I can see how someone reading without paying too much attention would read it as a call to arms and start taking sides except for the one guy who can't work out which side he's on (which inevitably happens on MW).

flts wrote:
What I'm trying to say that I've built a couple of dozen cases with varying suboptimal power solutions involving off the shelf AC-DC switchers and my own design bus boards, and have yet to hear a SINGLE complaint. Does that mean I'm an EE? No.


No it doesn't make you an EE.

flts wrote:
Does that mean my power solutions are good? No. It simply means they don't suck as much that people who've bought my cases would find it an issue.


Good enough for at least a couple of dozen customers. I wouldn't read too much into that other than perhaps the 'real world' bit.

flts wrote:
Paul, in turn, has probably spent equal or more time with Eurorack with his SynthTech Euro modules that are some of the most worry-free and solid I've used in the Euro land. I'd trust his word on electrical design for Eurorack based on that over many, many others in the business.


So would I. I won't let his online persona get in the way of my respect for his work. wink

flts wrote:
In any case, are you claiming, that someone with a decade of experience using a specific modular format is in advantage regarding product design compared to someone with less experience using that format in practise, but decades of experience in the actual product design and different modular formats / modular and analog synths in general?

This is one of the arguments I simply don't understand so I'd appreciate a clearer explanation of why it matters or invalidates the point about EE experience.


In some ways yes, except I'm not 'claiming' anything here. Designing a eurorack power solution poses a different set of challenges to other modular formats. I have first hand experience with these problems and I work with EE's and in order to solve them. I have never made any such bold claims as has been made in regards to LIBB. I simply do the best I can.

flts wrote:
OK, so you felt provocated by too brave or over the top marketing claims you didn't feel were substantiated, and that resulted in the tone of the voice of some of the discussion from your side. And, I assume, Paul and John felt provocated that John's product and their measurements were immediately called snake oil and invalid for about a dozen reasons, which probably resulted in the tone of the voice from the other side.


More or less. But to be clear I didn't call snake oil. I did mention they'd left themselves open to be called such though (in this case by another EE).

flts wrote:
I've found it's easy to get frustrated in internet because the actual communication doesn't work. Which is what most of this thread seems to be about now that you've explained your stance, and what most of internet discussion is. So instead of asking "to clarify, do you mean this", "I'm sure you have a good point there but can you expand on that" or "could you explain in a bit more detail, I didn't get a good idea of why this claim holds", it turns to "I want to know this!" "hey, here's an answer that doesn't cover what you're asking" "oh so you're deliverately avoiding things" "you're an idiot" type of discussion.


Absolutely 100%. It's a shame more people can't take it for what it is and instead feel the need to jump in and take sides.

flts wrote:
Again, my point was not that there haven't been any sensible points raised. My point was that the tone of the thread seems so hostile and mainly trying to poke holes, point errors and nitpick (not always nitpick!) about the white paper, the approach taken in the tests, or the product itself, that I'm not surprised some of the answers or Paul's comments are being quite terse and snarky as the tone of most of the commenters is pretty much that as well.


Fully understandable.

flts wrote:
Personally I'd say that is in the category of nit picking, as an "active bus board" is what is commonly called a "power supply". If you interpret it as hot air and false marketing then I do understand you feel angry about it.


A power supply is the thing you plug into the wall. An active (or powered) busboard has an onboard DC-DC convertor. There are standalone DC-DC's which can power a passive busboard. Active busboards are still busboards. Maybe I am nitpicking here..

flts wrote:
The right follow-up question here would be "I don't understand - can you explain in detail, in technical terms if applicable, why you consider these factors irrelevant?"


I really need you as my PR/marketing adviser. I could learn a lot from you.

flts wrote:
Then again, if there's no trust in the expertise of the designer to design a board, take a sensible set of comparative measurements and decide what set of variables, measurements and representative products makes sense, then I guess it's given that buying a premium priced product from someone whose expertise one doesn't trust doesn't make sense in the first place.


Exactly. This is kind of my point. I think the white paper was made with good intentions but it needed pointing out how it could be perceived as a publicity stunt.

flts wrote:
I am not disagreeing with many of your points raised, I'm disagreeing with the tone of voice of the comments that, to me, imply ill will instead of honest critique of the methods and an attempt to have a serious discussion, asking clarifying questions if necessary.


Well I tried, but it went downhill. I blame Paul and LoFi. wink

flts wrote:
In any case, to confirm, basically you are saying I, and the people following this discussion, should be convinced that you are being right and I am being wrong and unreasonable, because you have had private contact from unspecified number of unspecified people that hold greater authority or credibility than I do - even though you are actually not in liberty to name them and what they have said, so I should just trust you on this?


Good point. And although I get what you're saying, yes you should.
meatbeatz
Baddcr wrote:
Absolutely spot on - you have hit the nail on the head - and worse it's not the first time he's done this either!!

I gave the benefit of the doubt before but seeing this behaviour repeated again makes me realise this is nothing short of bullying.

I wish I could say it is isolated, but there are others in the Eurorack world who seem to think they are entitled and can push people around using these nasty techniques to discredit them and destroy their attempts at setting up a business.

I am absolutely not being over dramatic when I say it is industrial warfare.

I can't fucking stand bullies!


I know you've been waiting a long time for this. How many years ago was it? How many times has it happened since? You had an overpriced case you couldn't sell and you blame me for pointing out that it was an off the shelf case system when you'd claimed it was a custom design. Yes I have on the rare occasion taken someone to task over what I feel to be dubious claims. Yes, I've done this as a competitor.

There was a time on MW when it was quite common for designers to criticise each others work although as eurorack has 'grown up' it's become not the done thing. Thing is I learnt a lot in the days where designers were free to call bullshit when appropriate and I would say to a large extent it helped keep eurorack relatively honest. I'm sorry to say I've made beef with only a handful of MW members over such things but they happen to be the most vocal on the forum.
guestt
meatbeatz wrote:
Baddcr wrote:
Absolutely spot on - you have hit the nail on the head - and worse it's not the first time he's done this either!!

I gave the benefit of the doubt before but seeing this behaviour repeated again makes me realise this is nothing short of bullying.

I wish I could say it is isolated, but there are others in the Eurorack world who seem to think they are entitled and can push people around using these nasty techniques to discredit them and destroy their attempts at setting up a business.

I am absolutely not being over dramatic when I say it is industrial warfare.

I can't fucking stand bullies!


I know you've been waiting a long time for this. How many years ago was it? How many times has it happened since? You had an overpriced case you couldn't sell and you blame me for pointing out that it was an off the shelf case system when you'd claimed it was a custom design. Yes I have on the rare occasion taken someone to task over what I feel to be dubious claims. Yes, I've done this as a competitor.

There was a time on MW when it was quite common for designers to criticise each others work although as eurorack has 'grown up' it's become not the done thing. Thing is I learnt a lot in the days where designers were free to call bullshit when appropriate and I would say to a large extent it helped keep eurorack relatively honest. I'm sorry to say I've made beef with only a handful of MW members over such things but they happen to be the most vocal on the forum.


You keep telling yourself that - it was like being psychologically raped having my words twisted into something I never said or intended, which I see you are doing again now. Your apology obviously meant nothing. I had my doubts at the time, but here we are again - thanks for the confirmation of what you are.

There's a HUGE difference between thrashing things out in an amicable manner and this brutal, relentless stream of abuse you like throwing around at your competitors.

You sir, are a bad person, no matter how you dress it up in your mind.

I am sickened by this whole thing. I have resisted posting too many times as I don't want this to reflect badly on me, but enough is enough people need to know what you are up to.

Go and mind your own business... if you have anything left by now after the way you carry on, no right thinking person would ever buy anything from you again.

I will not be replying again here, but no doubt there will be another round of abuse, but at this point you are hurting yourself way more than are hurting anyone else, so you just carry on!
meatbeatz
radiokoala wrote:
What I'm saying (and it's a friendly advice for meatbeatz: I realize you didn't ask for it) is probably take it down a notch with the way you raise your questions, because for a casual observer it may look like you are trying to find faults in a competitor's product, all while promoting some of yours in their. This isn't doing you much favor.

And – you probably know, I generally have a sympathy towards you, and don't disagree with 99% of your posts, – but here I feel it's somewhat counter-constructive endeavor all in all, and some of the matters would be better off discussed via pm I feel. One could see it has already led to some people being turned off by Paul's replies to m.b like “illegitimate way of addressing customer's concerns” – whereas it wasn't really a customer-company interaction, rather "...three EE's come into a bar”. You know. razz

Cheers.


Thanks radiokoala. I've had a hard time adjusting to the concept of PR as a small business mainly because I'm opposed to everything it stands for. I'm beginning to understand why manufacturers don't engage with each other and their customer base like they used to on MW.
meatbeatz
Baddcr, I'm actually quite shaken to hear you talk like this. You are trying your best to destroy me while accusing me of doing the same to my competitors (and for the last time I don't, nor have I any plans to sell busboards separately to my cases). I was genuinely happy to hear from you last time you wrote so I'm disappointed as it's clear you've harboured resentment this whole time. Dunno what else to say but if anyone else out there wants to have a go, now's your chance.
Rex Coil 7
It appears I was mistaken about the spirit of the rules regarding new members with fewer than 100 posts being allowed to post entire threads promoting "new product announcements" as well as promoting entire businesses. It seems there are two different applications of the 100 post minimum rules, and those members with fewer than 100 posts with new product announcements are permitted to take full advantage of the exposure provided by posting product marketing threads in the general forums (opposed to doing so in the FS/T forum).

My apologies if I stirred up any shit over it. I should have made certain I had a full understanding of how these things are handled here prior to opening my trap. I'm clear on this issue now.

That said ... please ... carry on with the discussion. cool

I'll just quietly observe .... now, where's my dunce hat?
.... lol cool
GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
It appears I was mistaken about the spirit of the rules regarding new members with fewer than 100 posts being allowed to post entire threads promoting "new product announcements" as well as promoting entire businesses. It seems there are two different applications of the 100 post minimum rules, and those members with fewer than 100 posts with new product announcements are permitted to take full advantage of the exposure provided by posting product marketing threads in the general forums (opposed to doing so in the FS/T forum).

My apologies if I stirred up any shit over it. I should have made certain I had a full understanding of how these things are handled here prior to opening my trap. I'm clear on this issue now.

That said ... please ... carry on with the discussion. cool

I'll just quietly observe .... now, where's my dunce hat?
.... lol cool


Thanks for the clarification. FWIW, I have been on Muff's almost 8 years with hundreds of comments. The new Genus Modu ID was recently created for this modular product line.

John
paults
I'm so confused, I can't tell who the bad people are anymore.

Anyway:

1 - a bussbar system is the BEST POSSIBLE for "perfect DC power". It originated in central office telephone battery banks (-48V wet cell arrays) because old land-line phones used a LOT of power (around 90ma on a short loop when off-hook, plus ring voltages. In a former life, I designed telecom equipment).

However, low resistance is not all we need in Euro. We need BOTH a low resistance AND a low impedance. The low impedance is a deliberate AC path to GROUND, not a "path from A to B" like a buss bar. How is this path accomplished?

a) using capacitors, but in a VERY SPECIFIC way/selection
b) the layer "stack up" of the pc board

2 - arguments for "testing everything" are not required because we have enough understanding of the "things that come into play", so representative distribution system were tested. And no, there is no "missing data not in our favor". If you REALLY think there is, buy the equipment (there is an exact list with model numbers) and see for yourself.

3 - arguments based on the "BUT WHAT ABOUT...." modules is silly because (a) we get slagged for naming and (b) we DID test a LOT and you reach a point of diminishing returns.

Let me tell you a story about "knowledge" versus "understanding"

I recently looked at buying a purebred puppy whose prior lineage included getting 2nd place overall at Westminster, the largest dog show. The puppy was up for sale because it was "not show quality". But when my wife & I looked at it it looked like a great looking dog. I commented something like "I bet this dog could win some local contest!" and the breeder and the trainer just eyerolled and chuckled.

They had a combined 56 years winning dog shows, they have an UNDERSTANDING of this dog RELATIVE TO his father, a dog that won 17 ribbons. Now to ME, it's a perfectly fine dog, would do ALL the dog things. And people would come up and say "That's the cutest/prettiest dog EVAR!".

John & I have an UNDERSTANDING of passive buss boards, we can look at the overall construction and tell, as a GENERAL RULE, if it will have a better or worse performance than LIBB. It's not some sort of ego thing ANY MORE than a dog trainer looking at my puppy and saying "Errrr.....nope".

After trying to slog through all the posts the last 3 pages all I can manage is something like:

a) "best" = #Triggered
b) I am snarky

I haven't seen any sort of counter-measurement saying we lied/the data is false.

If marketing hyperbole grinds your gears, fine. But this thread....[eyeroll]
Multi Grooves
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
It appears I was mistaken about the spirit of the rules regarding new members with fewer than 100 posts being allowed to post entire threads promoting "new product announcements" as well as promoting entire businesses. It seems there are two different applications of the 100 post minimum rules, and those members with fewer than 100 posts with new product announcements are permitted to take full advantage of the exposure provided by posting product marketing threads in the general forums (opposed to doing so in the FS/T forum).

My apologies if I stirred up any shit over it. I should have made certain I had a full understanding of how these things are handled here prior to opening my trap. I'm clear on this issue now.

That said ... please ... carry on with the discussion. cool

I'll just quietly observe .... now, where's my dunce hat?
.... lol cool


::please not the kkk one....::

Ghost Ghost
MATSmile
Baddcr wrote:
meatbeatz wrote:
Baddcr wrote:
[...]


I know you've been waiting a long time for this. How many years ago was it? How many times has it happened since? You had an overpriced case you couldn't sell and you blame me for pointing out that it was an off the shelf case system when you'd claimed it was a custom design. Yes I have on the rare occasion taken someone to task over what I feel to be dubious claims. Yes, I've done this as a competitor.

There was a time on MW when it was quite common for designers to criticise each others work although as eurorack has 'grown up' it's become not the done thing. Thing is I learnt a lot in the days where designers were free to call bullshit when appropriate and I would say to a large extent it helped keep eurorack relatively honest. I'm sorry to say I've made beef with only a handful of MW members over such things but they happen to be the most vocal on the forum.


[...]

I can not contribute to the power supply discussion but I'm calling BS on what Baddcr said. I have a case made by meatbeatz and it's amazing. I remember seeing Baddcr's attempt to sell cases and it was generic 'fit rails in the suitcase and charge 1000$ for that'. Meatbeatz' cases pop up in every 'best case' threat so maybe baddcr it's time for you to forgive and learn something from him.
Roy72
MATSmile wrote:
Baddcr wrote:
meatbeatz wrote:
Baddcr wrote:
[...]


I know you've been waiting a long time for this. How many years ago was it? How many times has it happened since? You had an overpriced case you couldn't sell and you blame me for pointing out that it was an off the shelf case system when you'd claimed it was a custom design. Yes I have on the rare occasion taken someone to task over what I feel to be dubious claims. Yes, I've done this as a competitor.

There was a time on MW when it was quite common for designers to criticise each others work although as eurorack has 'grown up' it's become not the done thing. Thing is I learnt a lot in the days where designers were free to call bullshit when appropriate and I would say to a large extent it helped keep eurorack relatively honest. I'm sorry to say I've made beef with only a handful of MW members over such things but they happen to be the most vocal on the forum.


[...]

I can not contribute to the power supply discussion but I'm calling BS on what Baddcr said. I have a case made by meatbeatz and it's amazing. I remember seeing Baddcr's attempt to sell cases and it was generic 'fit rails in the suitcase and charge 1000$ for that'. Meatbeatz' cases pop up in every 'best case' threat so maybe baddcr it's time for you to forgive and learn something from him.


Well said, amalgamod cases are top notch.
GenusModu
LIBB is now in stock in the US at Control and Analogue Haven, and soon in the UK at Post Modular.
borris_yeltzun
GenusModu wrote:
windspirit wrote:
Looks solid but it seems like 16 spots might be a bit tight? If you have a couple of 4HP (or even 2HP) modules in there you might run out of positions. Is this meant to be a bus for a single row?


LIBB is meant for a single row, to fit within an 84 hp space alongside SynthTech's forthcoming Skunkworx Little Stinker power supplies. That limits the length of the board. I could consider a longer 20 connector solution in the future if there is sufficient demand.


Hey Paults,
got any more info you can give out on the little/ big stinker PSU you got in the works ?

am keen on upgrading my strange multi case 208hp 21u setup to a cleaner single 336hp 27u case. Rockin' Banana!

the plan is to use 18 x LIBB's and appropriate psu/psu's that will provide power with super low Noise and Ripple.

right now am abit on the fence about getting 18 x L-1 PSU's
Rex Coil 7
Multi Grooves wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
It appears I was mistaken about the spirit of the rules regarding new members with fewer than 100 posts being allowed to post entire threads promoting "new product announcements" as well as promoting entire businesses. It seems there are two different applications of the 100 post minimum rules, and those members with fewer than 100 posts with new product announcements are permitted to take full advantage of the exposure provided by posting product marketing threads in the general forums (opposed to doing so in the FS/T forum).

My apologies if I stirred up any shit over it. I should have made certain I had a full understanding of how these things are handled here prior to opening my trap. I'm clear on this issue now.

That said ... please ... carry on with the discussion. cool

I'll just quietly observe .... now, where's my dunce hat?
.... lol cool


::please not the kkk one....::

Ghost Ghost
Nope.
Rex Coil 7
GenusModu wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
It appears I was mistaken about the spirit of the rules regarding new members with fewer than 100 posts being allowed to post entire threads promoting "new product announcements" as well as promoting entire businesses. It seems there are two different applications of the 100 post minimum rules, and those members with fewer than 100 posts with new product announcements are permitted to take full advantage of the exposure provided by posting product marketing threads in the general forums (opposed to doing so in the FS/T forum).

My apologies if I stirred up any shit over it. I should have made certain I had a full understanding of how these things are handled here prior to opening my trap. I'm clear on this issue now.

That said ... please ... carry on with the discussion. cool

I'll just quietly observe .... now, where's my dunce hat?
.... lol cool


Thanks for the clarification. FWIW, I have been on Muff's almost 8 years with hundreds of comments. The new Genus Modu ID was recently created for this modular product line.

John
For future reference, it would have been very helpful had you mentioned that up front. At face value a member with 7 posts that begins a new thread (with what could have been taken as SPAM), looked ... well ... less than good. In all things in life, consider how things appear to others before moving forward. I'm no champion, to be sure. But coming forward with your history right off the get-go may have made others take you more seriously, and less suspicious of what you were up to. Take it from someone who's fallen on his face more than once, clearly I am no golden example of a socially proficient and well mannered person. But taking a moment to step back and taking a look at how you're presenting yourself before hitting ~submit~ is good advice, coming from anyone.

I attempt to remember that when I am posting, the entire planet is my audience. I also attempt to keep in mind that not everyone is familiar with who I am (not everyone is familiar with the well knowns within the Euro users group ... chances are since I'm a 5U maven most folks in the Euro subforum don't know me from Adam, for example). Presuming otherwise can create problems that are unnecessary. In motorcycle racing, it's known as "avoidable contact" ... that is to say someone created a problem unnecessarily.

Just my views, of which everyone has their own.

Thanks for the reply, John.

cool
Rex Coil 7
glennfin wrote:
Yes, I figured they weren't Hinton's. Of course they look great!. I will make my own as well... if my wrist can hold out from all that drilling and tapping. woah woah

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
glennfin wrote:
I have a fairly large system. I'm using a combination of Doepfer and clicks and clocks backplanes. Some are daisy chained, some parallel fed. All fed from linear 15 amp +/- 12v supplies. Never had a problem with any kind of "noise". That being said, As my system grows bigger and bigger eek! I plan on upgrading power distribution to buss bars, as shown in this photo...

I figured, if I'm going to upgrade, might as well go all the way. cool

As I read further into this thread I said to myself... "what? no comment from Mr. Hinton???" hihi hihi

Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Bus bars all the way. Matched with proper attention paid to grounding, zero volt issues, and a solid linear power supply, they're the apex of power distribution systems.



Everything else is "also ran" competition.

cool
These aren't Hinton bus bars, I made them myself.
First off, thanks much for the compliments, and I appreciate your candor.

Second, look closely at the picture of my bus bar system. Note how the bars are raised above the bottom of the cabinet. The reason for that is I needed clearance beneath the bars to permit the use of nuts and washers on the #8 stainless screws used to secure the eyelets on each power cable. Using nuts and washers instead of threaded holes eliminates the need for tapping. Doing it that way saved me from hand tapping 100 eyelet holes! In my situation this method worked. It may not work for every situation, granted.

Hit the link in my signature to get more details on what it takes, as well as citing sources for materials and hardware I used. If you do your layout and center punching patiently, a mill or drill press is not required to obtain slick results.

Ok, relinquishing control of the thread back to the OP. Highjack complete.

thumbs up
TemplarK
Does Libb do anything for digital to analog crosstalk i am experiencing from sequencers to oscillators/filters(when self oscilating). I especially hear this when i am using distortion; would Libb help or is putting Digital and Analog modules in seperate cases the only real way to avoid this scenario?

edit - Specifically my Metropolis is a culprit here as she plays all the oscillators all the time lol...
Summa
TemplarK wrote:
Does Libb do anything for digital to analog crosstalk i am experiencing from sequencers to oscillators/filters(when self oscilating). I especially hear this when i am using distortion; would Libb help or is putting Digital and Analog modules in seperate cases the only real way to avoid this scenario?

edit - Specifically my Metropolis is a culprit here as she plays all the oscillators all the time lol...


I found out that Metropolis really didn't like a switching supply so once I swapped for a linear it was dead silent. So maybe you need to start in that end first? hmmm.....
GenusModu
TemplarK wrote:
Does Libb do anything for digital to analog crosstalk i am experiencing from sequencers to oscillators/filters(when self oscilating). I especially hear this when i am using distortion; would Libb help or is putting Digital and Analog modules in seperate cases the only real way to avoid this scenario?

edit - Specifically my Metropolis is a culprit here as she plays all the oscillators all the time lol...


Yes, LIBB reduces noise across the audio spectrum. For sequencer LEDs, even though the pulses may be below audio rate, the high speed transitions can cause harmonics all the way into the audio range. I have seen LED pulse edges faster than 10 nanoseconds, creating dozens of harmonics above the fundamental. Microcontroller based systems can also "scan" the LEDS at audio rates, creating pulses that you never see but can be heard as noise.

Typical levels of noise dampening compared to other solutions is shown in the Eurorack Power Distribution white paper, Audio and Video Frequency Range Results.
http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#results-intro

The white paper also explains why you are hearing it more with distortion, which can greatly amplify noise. See the section on "How do Modules generate, share and amplify noise?
http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#theory
GenusModu
Summa wrote:
TemplarK wrote:
Does Libb do anything for digital to analog crosstalk i am experiencing from sequencers to oscillators/filters(when self oscilating). I especially hear this when i am using distortion; would Libb help or is putting Digital and Analog modules in seperate cases the only real way to avoid this scenario?

edit - Specifically my Metropolis is a culprit here as she plays all the oscillators all the time lol...


I found out that Metropolis really didn't like a switching supply so once I swapped for a linear it was dead silent. So maybe you need to start in that end first? hmmm.....


Replacing a power supply to reduce intermodule noise coupling is an unusual result. Do you mind mentioning which switching supply you replaced? If the switching PSU has a large inductor or high series resistance on its output that could inhibit low frequency noise dampening in the system.

Was the switcher near its rated power output? That could increase modulation on the power bus.

Was the wire gauge or length changed when switching to linear?

What type of power bus are you using? Did that change with the swap? It sounds the bus was kept the same.
Rex Coil 7
Interesting thread.
Rex Coil 7
lol I just finished reading this entire thread (so far). Now, clearly (and crucially) I am easily the village idiot around here when it comes to "EE fights" and knowing one technical examination from another.

But I gotta say ... this was one of the best GEEK FIGHTS I've witnessed in a very long time. lol applause w00t

Granted, I don't cruise the likes of Gear Sluts or Harmony Central, so I am certain there are more energized typing fights in other, less well membered forums than Miffwugglers. But for around here, this has gone from immensely entertaining (as in funny as hell) all the way over to mind numbing (sp?), and seemingly endless drones of arguing sheepskin holders going on and on about how big their virtual cocks are. I can't recall a thread with as many multi syllable words slung about (although I'm sure there are more than a few).

Who cares what John, Paul, George, and Ringo claim? We're talking about a ONE HUNDRED DOLLAR ITEM! Is it really worth all of the shit slinging that's gone on here? My god, all of the picking of nits in this monumental pissin' contest has done nothing but get the floor all wet.

In my experience with peace keeping and engaging with others as someone with a history of breaking the "everyone knows that" rules, I know threatened behavior when I smell it. Most anyone that has spent any time developing things that are innovative and different than status quo will back me up when I say ....

If you're being challenged by those that claim you're full of shit with your new (and demonstrably better) idea, that usually means you're on to something really good!

Again ... I'm just the dipshit with a drill, soldering pen, and a hammer in this thread with a 12th grade education and no formal electronics training. Y'know, another within the numbers of average modular synth consumers.

But as a spectator, this thread has been HIGHLY ENTERTAINING!!! Utter loads of ... Viking Fencing The MSN Smack! Nutter! smack! Soapbox f u Redneck POW! poke Rage!

So please continue, it's providing a great belly laugh along it's journey. Some of it reminds me of divorcing parents. Can't wait until it sinks to ......



lol lol lol lol lol lol
TemplarK
Im don't thinkk arguing like children should be applauded on the forum. This might have not been the worst arguing seen on Muffs but its a fine line sometimes between tolerable and all out fighting that needs moderation. I think tbh all non-relevant posts about old cases and other such stuff should be taken out of the thread and give the Libb a chance like all other vendors get to promote a new product the Eurorack community might be interested in. If this was a "noise reduction module" and its was evident it worked somewhat no one would be arguing just applauding the innovation.
Joe.
TemplarK wrote:
Im don't thinkk arguing like children should be applauded on the forum.


How would you suggest unsubstantiated claims be responded to, that are being used to promote a product, so that the conversation isn't seen to be the 'arguments of children'.
TemplarK
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
lol I just finished reading this entire thread (so far). Now, clearly (and crucially) I am easily the village idiot around here when it comes to "EE fights" and knowing one technical examination from another.

But I gotta say ... this was one of the best GEEK FIGHTS I've witnessed in a very long time. lol applause w00t

Granted, I don't cruise the likes of Gear Sluts or Harmony Central, so I am certain there are more energized typing fights in other, less well membered forums than Miffwugglers. But for around here, this has gone from immensely entertaining (as in funny as hell) all the way over to mind numbing (sp?), and seemingly endless drones of arguing sheepskin holders going on and on about how big their virtual cocks are. I can't recall a thread with as many multi syllable words slung about (although I'm sure there are more than a few).

Who cares what John, Paul, George, and Ringo claim? We're talking about a ONE HUNDRED DOLLAR ITEM! Is it really worth all of the shit slinging that's gone on here? My god, all of the picking of nits in this monumental pissin' contest has done nothing but get the floor all wet.

In my experience with peace keeping and engaging with others as someone with a history of breaking the "everyone knows that" rules, I know threatened behavior when I smell it. Most anyone that has spent any time developing things that are innovative and different than status quo will back me up when I say ....

If you're being challenged by those that claim you're full of shit with your new (and demonstrably better) idea, that usually means you're on to something really good!

The following statement is coming from the guy that insists that bus bar systems are the apex predator of DC power distribution in modular synthesizers .....

I'll be placing my order with the next uncommitted $100 bucks I can round up.

I'm sold, but again ... I'm just the dipshit with a drill, soldering pen, and a hammer in this thread with a 12th grade education and no formal electronics training. Y'know, another within the numbers of average modular synth consumers.

But as a spectator, this thread has been HIGHLY ENTERTAINING!!! Utter loads of ... Viking Fencing The MSN Smack! Nutter! smack! Soapbox f u Redneck POW! poke Rage!

So please continue, it's providing a great belly laugh along it's journey. Some of it reminds me of divorcing parents. Can't wait until it sinks to ......



lol lol lol lol lol lol


My post was in response to this comment maybe i should have quoted it. I'm not talking about any of the talk about claims about Libb and how to substatiate them, more about old arguments about people selling cases and such being brought into the topic.
GenusModu
In a long thread like this it is easy for newcomers to wonder what all the fuss about. I recommend everyone go to the web site and decide for themselves. I've done what I believe to be the only comparative study with data of different eurorack passive bus distribution systems, lacking only a comparison on pure bus bar systems, which have no published data.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html

The original product announcement also seemed to generate some controversy. Here's the link:

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb.html

As always I look forward to any technical questions, comments or suggestions.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Joe.
GenusModu wrote:
I've done what I believe to be the only comparative study with data of different eurorack passive bus distribution systems, lacking only a comparison on pure bus bar systems, which have no published data.


You still have this statement as the opining line on your website:

GenusModu wrote:
“Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy”


That's a definitive sentence.

It implies you've tested all other passive bus boards, that your test data proves it. Your study is nice and well written, but it does not substantiate the claim you have made.
GenusModu
LoFi Junglist wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
I've done what I believe to be the only comparative study with data of different eurorack passive bus distribution systems, lacking only a comparison on pure bus bar systems, which have no published data.


You still have this statement as the opining line on your website:

GenusModu wrote:
“Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy”


That's a definitive sentence.

It implies you've tested all other passive bus boards, that your test data proves it. Your study is nice and well written, but it does not substantiate the claim you have made.


This was my response to a similar query from another poster:

"Your request for comparative tests amount to thousands of hours of work, for products that don't provide a single spec of their own. Why should I do that? The test results in the white paper represent the three main classes of power distribution. FYI I did not choose the "crappiest" products out there. Products were chosen to be representative of their category. The category results are not going to vary that much due to the limitations of their similar geometries. There is no reason to test them all when I know the results will be almost the same. Maybe it is not that obvious to other folks. How can I help people understand that? "

Do I need to explain the differences between 1, 2 or 4 ounce copper with "thick" traces and no SMT caps and why those boards cannot be quieter than LIBB with multilayer planes? Most of that explanation is in the white paper, but I feel that really isn't the question.

The assertion that everything has to be tested is incorrect. There is no magic in those bus boards, it is all engineering science, and someone practiced in the art of PCB design can make determinations without testing everything. This has been stated before by others, several times over.

By what mechanism do you believe some other passive bus board is quieter?

I do welcome data from other vendors. I believe the entire customer base would benefit.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
2disbetter
Just commenting on the EHA kits; thanks for the generous amount of wire and color coding. Made install easy and not stressful.

Great product and clear thorough instructions.

2d
GenusModu
2disbetter wrote:
Just commenting on the EHA kits; thanks for the generous amount of wire and color coding. Made install easy and not stressful.

Great product and clear thorough instructions.

2d


Thanks for mentioning it. Here's the link to the EHA web page, including the usual technical details and scope pictures.

EHA is a kit with two small adapter boards plus heavy 14 AWG wire that lets you attach Tip Top uZeus, 4ms Row Power, Synthrotek 4 hp Power and other power modules to LIBB or other bus boards. With EHA + LIBB you'll reduce both switching power supply noise and intermodule coupling noise in your system, while retaining the investment in your power supply.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/eha.html
Rex Coil 7
5U users would also benefit from something along the lines of the LIBB.

Terminations at the board would need to be worked out, other than that there doesn't seem to be much more that needs looking after. There's already a 5v plane. 15v operation would be needed as well. It seems like an easy retrofit (says the guy that doesn't have to work it out).

seriously, i just don't get it

RE; the power cable connections, perhaps the set-screw type? Cut off the existing connector, stick the bitter end into the socket, tighten the "set screw" and call it done. Sorry, I can't recall the technical name for that type of connection, so "set screw type" is all I got.

Or screw terminals such as what are used on Barrier Strips (aka Terminal Strips). That way the end user can cut off the proprietary bus-end of their existing power cables, add crimp eyelets, install the cables, and be done with it.

Just some thinking out loud, for whatever it's worth.

cool
GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
5U users would also benefit from something along the lines of the LIBB.

Terminations at the board would need to be worked out, other than that there doesn't seem to be much more that needs looking after. There's already a 5v plane. 15v operation would be needed as well. It seems like an easy retrofit (says the guy that doesn't have to work it out).

seriously, i just don't get it

RE; the power cable connections, perhaps the set-screw type? Cut off the existing connector, stick the bitter end into the socket, tighten the "set screw" and call it done. Sorry, I can't recall the technical name for that type of connection, so "set screw type" is all I got.

Or screw terminals such as what are used on Barrier Strips (aka Terminal Strips). That way the end user can cut off the proprietary bus-end of their existing power cables, add crimp eyelets, install the cables, and be done with it.

Just some thinking out loud, for whatever it's worth.

cool


Terminal blocks have a set screw and slot for inserting the wires.

I'm sorry to say this, but 5U/MOTM is a mature market at best with near zero growth of systems. There is not much reason to develop new bus boards for them.
Rex Coil 7
Oky doky. cool
Roy72
Given the heterogenous nature of eurorack systems and their power problems, I think it will be interesting to see if people who switch to the LIBB report noticeable improvements in the field.

This will be a bigger test than lab measurements in a controlled environment, that it is not possible for eurorack users to replicate, particularly if they are playing live.
Rex Coil 7
thumbs up
listentoaheartbeat
Citizen Klaus
Alright, *setting aside* everything else, I'm interested in the LIBB and have a question about installation and retrofitting. Does anyone know what is the distance is between the mounting holes? I'm wondering if I could gut, say, an Arturia Rackbrute case and use one or two of these, instead (probably along with a new power input module).
GenusModu
Citizen Klaus wrote:
Alright, *setting aside* everything else, I'm interested in the LIBB and have a question about installation and retrofitting. Does anyone know what is the distance is between the mounting holes? I'm wondering if I could gut, say, an Arturia Rackbrute case and use one or two of these, instead (probably along with a new power input module).


Distance between the furthest LIBB mounting holes is 10.9 inches in the horizontal direction and 1.5 inches in the vertical direction.

Since the power connections are edge mounted, the total clerance requirements are larger than the board. A drilling and mounting template is provided on the web site and can be printed 1:1 on a legal size (8.5 x 14 inch) sheet.

http://www.genusmodu.com/files/LIBB/LIBB_A2_Mounting_Template.pdf

The LIBB specifications provide the minimum recommended clearance measurements: Minimum Clearance for side mounted power cable connectors, 3.90 inches by 13.20 inches (99.1 x 335.3 mm). This allows space for getting the module power connectors into the right angle mounted headers on LIBB.

You can easily fit one LIBB in a 3U or two LIBBS in a 6U Arturia Rackbrute case.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
TemplarK
listentoaheartbeat wrote:


Haha this is brilliant!
TemplarK
I was wondering if the holes have been made so you could easily swop our Doepfer budboards without drilling etc?
2disbetter
TemplarK wrote:


Haha this is brilliant!


Funny but hardly useful to a market largely under served with quality power products.

2d
paults
HAHA bussbars are not the best Euro solution when switchers are driving the DC power and/or you have any aggressor digital modules.
TemplarK
2disbetter wrote:
TemplarK wrote:


Haha this is brilliant!


Funny but hardly useful to a market largely under served with quality power products.

2d


Yeah I thought it was funny meme
GenusModu
TemplarK wrote:
I was wondering if the holes have been made so you could easily swap our Doepfer budboards without drilling etc?


No, sorry. Every bus board model has different mounting holes as far as I can tell.

I would never put mounting holes on only one side of a bus board. Such a solution is unlikely to pass a shock and vibe test, as used for insuring that products can ship across continents and oceans and still survive with a statiscally low risk of damage.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Roy72 wrote:
Given the heterogenous nature of eurorack systems and their power problems, I think it will be interesting to see if people who switch to the LIBB report noticeable improvements in the field.

This will be a bigger test than lab measurements in a controlled environment, that it is not possible for eurorack users to replicate, particularly if they are playing live.
Agreed, and I'm certain they of Genus Modu are acutely aware of that. This manufacturer is fearlessly putting their efforts out there for the end users to critique. With a brand new product, what else are they able to offer except test data?

As time goes by, the end user is becoming more informed. Building better synths by starting out with better foundation gear is gaining traction as a philosophy within Euro users. The LIBB seems to be a response to that.

John and Paul are betting the farm on their offerings. If their product doesn't live up to their claims, they'll be tarred and feathered and run out of town on the next train in every forum ... and go belly up. It takes a shitload of confidence and courage to present the quantity and depth of information about their design that they've provided. It attracts criticism, and even provides convenient specific targets to criticize. That approach takes guts, and confidence in their efforts.

With all of the suspicion focused on this LIBB gadget in this thread, I'd bet they'd have been better off just saying "our stuff is the best, and it's this much money ... BUY IT!". Allowing the perceived value of a $100 bus board to do all of the talking for them. Prestige goes a hell of a long way towards successful sales.

However, it appears to me that they've elected to take the high road. Confidently so. That, all by itself, says a lot.

Let the games begin.

cool


The lab controlled environment was used to make a fair comparison across different bus solutions, holding certain variables constant such as module selection and location of the power cable on the bus. It does not make any of the solutions look better or worse than they really are, nor does it change simply because the system is now in a live or studio environment.

The Low Impedance Bus Board was engineered with the same Power Integrity principals used in all modern cell phones, desktop or laptop computers, computer servers, and just about any modern electronic product. Those principals remove the risk of randomly designed power solutions using outdated practices from the 1980s. LIBB has a low resistance and low inductance path to distributed low ESR caps for additional high frequency noise mitigation, above and beyond the simple low resistance copper path of heavy copper bus board or bus bar systems.

Of course, absolute values of noise will change across systems, due to the variables of modules as "aggressors" and "victims" within the system, as explained in the section "How do modules generate, share and amplify noise."

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#theory

Users with LIBB will see a system wide noise reduction proportional to the same differences as shown extensively in the Eurorack Power Distribution White Paper. I also have a system wiring guide to insure that poor wiring does not compromise the design. There is nothing magic, random or left to chance in the solution. It is all just simply modern 21st century engineering applied to a new product space.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Rex Coil 7
My post is meant to be a compliment. Clumsy, perhaps.
Roy72
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
With a brand new product, what else are they able to offer except test data?


I think the quality and usefulness of the test data has been overstated, it's not easily replicable, transparent and produced in-house, but anyway.
Audio files may have been useful so interested people (who aren't EEs) could hear the difference (or did I miss those)?

What most manufacturers seem to do in euroland do is beta-testing, sending out examples to users to put through their paces. Paults does this with the Synthtech stuff, lots of videos on those modules, I'm curious why this hasn't happened with the LIBB.
paults
Quote:

I think the quality and usefulness of the test data has been overstated, it's not easily replicable, transparent and produced in-house, but anyway.


a) Umm...it's EXACTLY repeatable. We gave you EXACTLY how it was measured. I don't understand what you mean.

b) because the claim of 'best' triggered most of this (really?....sigh but....OK) how does one claim 'best' without having.....I dunno......[gestures wildly about]......data to back it up?

c) 'producred in-house'. REALLY, this is a hint of some sort of 'cheating'?

So, by this VERY SAME logic, if Mutable prints data that their +12V current use on a module is 42ma, YOU then SAY "Well, that was measured IN-HOUSE!!" and therefore, somehow suspect?

If I print out a Texas Instruments data sheet on a LM4040B25 voltage regulator, are all the specs then SUSPECT because TI measured these 'in-house'?

And people think I make wild statements [eyeroll].
Rex Coil 7
paults wrote:
HAHA bussbars are not the best Euro solution when switchers are driving the DC power and/or you have any aggressor digital modules.
Ok.
Roy72
paults wrote:
Quote:

I think the quality and usefulness of the test data has been overstated, it's not easily replicable, transparent and produced in-house, but anyway.


a) Umm...it's EXACTLY repeatable. We gave you EXACTLY how it was measured. I don't understand what you mean.

b) because the claim of 'best' triggered most of this (really?....sigh but....OK) how does one claim 'best' without having.....I dunno......[gestures wildly about]......data to back it up?

c) 'producred in-house'. REALLY, this is a hint of some sort of 'cheating'?

So, by this VERY SAME logic, if Mutable prints data that their +12V current use on a module is 42ma, YOU then SAY "Well, that was measured IN-HOUSE!!" and therefore, somehow suspect?

If I print out a Texas Instruments data sheet on a LM4040B25 voltage regulator, are all the specs then SUSPECT because TI measured these 'in-house'?

And people think I make wild statements [eyeroll].


What I meant was, that a lot of people in the eurorack production world do not have access to the same testing facilities, good or bad, they rely on beta-testing.

The 'best' and 'procured inhouse' are related. Mutable are not saying they have the best 12v. You are not saying your LIBB produces 12V better than anyone else, it's a more complex measurement over multiple factors that leads to your 'best conclusion'. To use your iPhone example, Apple don't claim its the 'best' because the screen measures exactly 4.3 inches.
Rex Coil 7
paults wrote:
.... 'producred in-house'. REALLY, this is a hint of some sort of 'cheating'?
Consumers have been mislead for decades (centuries? eons?) by manufacturers for many years.
paults
Quote:
"Our 7-way bus cards have 3 Oz copper and a groundplane with a maximum resistance of 18milliohm between terminals and connectors. If used for less than 500mA total load the maximum voltage drop will be less than 9mV.


This is a decent bussboard, IF AND ONLY IF the driving power supply is a linear, not a switcher.

Since 99.9% of Euro cases and power supplies use switchers AND since 99.9% of digital modules either use switchers on the module OR generate noise down the supply/ground lines themselves ("aggressors'), the Hinton solution does nothing for reducing noise.

Repeat: you need BOTH a low resistance AND a low impedance for Euro.
paults
Quote:
Don't take the criticism so personally.


I never take CRITICISM personally. I have a pretty thick skin in that regard.

Now, if you carefully, without emotion or bias, look at the EXACT things I respond to (usually using lots of hyperbole) it's people stating opinion as fact, it's saying EE stuff when they have ZERO EE background (being a 'highly skilled and interested hobbyist' is not 1% of thinking like an EE) or saying stuff that is basically, made up.

People implying "just because" a test is done in-house, in an industry that 99.999999% of testing is done 'in-house' is somehow "tainted", is just silly.

Not knowing the difference between low resistance and low impedance means before you post, maybe read up a bit???

I still think the VAST majority is simply getting all worked up over the claim of 'best'. JUST ADMIT IT SlayerBadger!
paults
As far as "posting videos" like a before and after (assuming it has to be from an 'end-user' who would actually want to do this sort of thing), here is EXACTLY what the responses would be:

a - "well, that doesn't really prove anything, because that system is [bigger/smaller/uses a different power brick/is a different color/I don't like the poster on the wall/...] than mine"

b - "I don't have those modules in the video so really I can't decide or not"

c- "Well sure that was a large 3 row system but I have this like uZeus in a skiff"

and so on and so on....... because in Euro threads on Muff's, there is always the "YEAH BUT...." argument.

Maybe in a while after people have wired them in and used them for a while, they will post results.
Roy72
paults wrote:

I still think the VAST majority is simply getting all worked up over the claim of 'best'. JUST ADMIT IT SlayerBadger!


I'll admit it, along with the dismissiveness of any questioning particularly when it ends in a 'trust us we're engineers' line.

I am nervous that this producer led marketing hype (as opposed to consumer) will be some kind of new norm in eurorack, but I guess as the market grows the alpha dogs will be around. Whether its best or not, choosing to use that word yourselves is marketing hype.
paults
Quote:
along with the dismissiveness of any questioning particularly when it ends in a 'trust us we're engineers' line.


It's not being 'dismissive' if we give you an answer that either:

a) you don't understand (resistance versus impedance)
b) you DISMISS (you SAID THE WORD BEST....GAAAAAAAAA)
c) you disagree with

I fully get the 'Euro vibe": hype-free, community, wild wild west, etc.

But we alpha dogs are here, and guess what? THIS EE ALPHA dog wants Euro to GET IT'S SHIT TOGETHER before it goes down in FCC/UL/CE flames. Because once attention is drawn over here by a 'real' company, it will not be.....pretty.

I want nothing more than for people, that are not EEs, to at least TRY to think like EEs. And this is what all you non-EEs need to print out and tape over your desk/bench and really think about.

A Design is not a Product.
DMR
paults wrote:


Since 99.9% of Euro cases and power supplies use switchers AND since 99.9% of digital modules either use switchers on the module OR generate noise down the supply/ground lines themselves ("aggressors'), the Hinton solution does nothing for reducing noise.



99.9% of Euro power supplies are switching? Aren't all the Doepfer PSU1 and PSU2's linear?
paults
Yes, but they are about the only ones, and PSU1 no longer made.

TipTop, MakeNoise, Intellijel, etc are 100% switchers.
Rex Coil 7
Interesting.
Rex Coil 7
(double post)
paults
Quote:
It's your opinion that the LIBB is the "best".


No, the 38 pages of data SHOW that it's CURRENTLY the best.

But a bigger question remains: why can't the LIBB actually BE the best? Is that not allowed somehow? I mean, it's 100% MEASUREMENTS. We are not arguing about the 'best' VCO, or the "best 'starter system'.

Yes, I'll admit, it's kinda 'amusing' to see everyone complain about this 1 little word.

No one is wondering about the actual product. They are upset that is 1 word has "somehow sneaked in" to Euro marketing language and this act has somehow "ruined everything".

Even after 50 posts of the 2 of use, plus 38 pages of documentation, it's all cast aside like "SORRY NOT ALLOWED, YOU SAID THE WORD!!!"

It's more of a social experiment to me at this point. Maybe it IS the "unwritten rule" somewhere. OK, is it possible to "look past" that word? Is anyone out there STILL THINK we

a) faked the data
b) misled anyone with the data
c) altered the results of the data

because the data says: the LIBB is the BEST passive buss board when using switching power supplies as the driving voltage AND it's also the best when aggressor modules are present.

Because data, and PLEASE, I BEG YOU, spend the $20,000 and duplicate our results independently. PLEASE. I'll go wait over there.

Because we are ONLY talking MEASUREMENTS. Not OPINIONS here. MEASUREMENTS. nanners very frustrating Guinness ftw!
2disbetter
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
paults wrote:
.... Now, if you carefully, without emotion or bias, look at the EXACT things I respond to (usually using lots of hyperbole) it's people stating opinion as fact, it's saying EE stuff when they have ZERO EE background (being a 'highly skilled and interested hobbyist' is not 1% of thinking like an EE) or saying stuff that is basically, made up.
Ok, well and good, you're better than those of us without an EE. Gotchya! And you saying the LIBB is the "best" is "stating opinion as fact".


Listen, I'm not a fan of Paul's customer interaction methods. I totally agree that the way he handles himself in this forum damages his sales more than he realizes. I am in no way championing the way he chooses to carry himself, BUT I feel like you are missing an important point. Namely, that if they as EEs, utilized a method or component in a way that gives them results, and they are sure no other product is using these methods or components, then their claim is valid. Just because every customer isn't a fellow EE doesn't make the claim false.

Now, there are of course possibilities that fluff and these facts are being used to smoke screen an embellisheed claim. This is the risk in any such product. However, it is a pretty big gamble to make such a claim, and then stick to it, if it is false, because evidence of that would be incredibly damaging, and is certianly no way to build a sustainable business.

I'm very happy with my LIBB/EHA purchases.

From a customer standpoint, and as someone who has looked for solutions to my power problems, the LIBB is a step in a much needed better direction.

2d
Roy72
paults wrote:
Quote:
It's your opinion that the LIBB is the "best".


No, the 38 pages of data SHOW that it's CURRENTLY the best.

But a bigger question remains: why can't the LIBB actually BE the best? Is that not allowed somehow? I mean, it's 100% MEASUREMENTS. We are not arguing about the 'best' VCO, or the "best 'starter system'.

Yes, I'll admit, it's kinda 'amusing' to see everyone complain about this 1 little word.

No one is wondering about the actual product. They are upset that is 1 word has "somehow sneaked in" to Euro marketing language and this act has somehow "ruined everything".

Even after 50 posts of the 2 of use, plus 38 pages of documentation, it's all cast aside like "SORRY NOT ALLOWED, YOU SAID THE WORD!!!"

It's more of a social experiment to me at this point. Maybe it IS the "unwritten rule" somewhere. OK, is it possible to "look past" that word? Is anyone out there STILL THINK we

a) faked the data
b) misled anyone with the data
c) altered the results of the data

because the data says: the LIBB is the BEST passive buss board when using switching power supplies as the driving voltage AND it's also the best when aggressor modules are present.

Because data, and PLEASE, I BEG YOU, spend the $20,000 and duplicate our results independently. PLEASE. I'll go wait over there.

Because we are ONLY talking MEASUREMENTS. Not OPINIONS here. MEASUREMENTS. nanners very frustrating Guinness ftw!


I don't think anyone has accused you of faking data, just not acknowledging it's limitations and continuing to point to it as definitive. The data says its better than what you compared it to in those circumstances, anything else seems to me requires us to trust your EE design skills. I'm not questioning those at all, just point to me where your data says the LIBB is definitively better than the Hinton system, or the Intellijel, or the Elby, for example.
GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
My post is meant to be a compliment. Clumsy, perhaps.


Ah, sorry, my post was also in response to the one you responded to.
GenusModu
Roy72 wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
With a brand new product, what else are they able to offer except test data?


I think the quality and usefulness of the test data has been overstated, it's not easily replicable, transparent and produced in-house, but anyway.
Audio files may have been useful so interested people (who aren't EEs) could hear the difference (or did I miss those)?

What most manufacturers seem to do in euroland do is beta-testing, sending out examples to users to put through their paces. Paults does this with the Synthtech stuff, lots of videos on those modules, I'm curious why this hasn't happened with the LIBB.


Chris Meyer of Learning Modular beta tested LIBB with successful results for his noise issues with a Row Power system. I tried a few others but they were not able to test at the time due to other priorities.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
paults wrote:
HAHA bussbars are not the best Euro solution when switchers are driving the DC power and/or you have any aggressor digital modules.
Just to get it said, Hinton offers other solutions than just bus bars. Graham may be best known for his bus bar systems, but he also offers bus boards (aka "distribution cards").



Link = http://hinton-instruments.co.uk/paprod/psu/distribution.htm

At present currency conversion rates ($1.409 to 1.00 BSP) they sell for $50.73 USD ... works out to $7.23 per header. International shipping not included. However his boards ("cards") offer a few more options than the LIBB (such as catering to those of us that own 5U systems, as well as Wiard, FRAC, MOTM et al), whether that is of any interest to anyone considering uprating their synths is another issue altogether.

Quoted from the page I've provided the link to;

"Our 7-way bus cards have 3 Oz copper and a groundplane with a maximum resistance of 18milliohm between terminals and connectors. If used for less than 500mA total load the maximum voltage drop will be less than 9mV.

Both 16 pin 0.1" boxed headers and 4+2-way KK 0.156" headers may be supplied in various combinations to cater for most modular systems. Any not directly compatible may use a KK adapter cable to the modules.

Eurorack CV and Gate buses are taken to KK 0.1" headers. May be used for either ±12V or ±15V analogue rails plus either +5V or +48V rails.

Mounting hardware and faston supply cables are included. We can provide single or multiple distribution cards mounted and wired on 19" panels or rear panels in integrated 19" frames."

(end quote)

The LIBB is $99.00 USD .... works out to $6.25 per header.

However 5U users aren't catered to due to the "maturity of that market".

I mean, if we're going to begin drawing comparisons and all
..... seriously, i just don't get it

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, Graham does offer various resistance figures for bus bars. He doesn't post them because most (all?) of his bus bars are custom in pretty much every way. Bar length, number of termination holes, bus bar width/height, mounting holes, and so on. I've found that when corresponding with him regarding all of that, he's quite generous with these figures, and he demonstrates exactly how he arrived at the numbers. I mention this because I've seen it said in this thread that "Hinton doesn't offer any figures or values of bus bars that I've seen .... has anyone else? ... I didn't think so" (or something to that order). Each bus bar order is custom, he does not keep any ~stocked~ prefabbed bus bar systems. He manufactures them per order in his own machine shop.

I'm not defending him, nor am I a fanboy, I'm just offering fair information and fair comparison. That does not mean that I do not find the LIBB to be a wonderful addition to high end power systems for Euro synths. Something that is about as rare as chicken teeth at this juncture in time.

hihi


Rex Coil,

That is likely your best option for a low resistance MOTM bus board. I thought the 18 mohm resistance was a bit higher than expected for a small 3 oz board though. The Hinton compact bus board does not have any capacitance to help with high frequency switching noise. Fortunately those types of devices are less common in the 5U/MOTM format than they are in euro.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
paults
Quote:
just point to me where your data says the LIBB is definitively better than the Hinton system, or the Intellijel, or the Elby, for example


We can't call out by name. You KNOW that, everyone here KNOWS that. Because look at Reason (g) below:

Reason's people on Muff's won't buy from me over the years

a) panels are too narrow
b) panels are too wide
c) panels lack attenuators
d) don't like the font
e) don't like the knobs
f) don't like me
g) you 'slag' people because you call them by name
h) you argue all the time
j) you tend to pull the 'EE card' too much, especially during technical discussions

I've probably left a few out

I'll try one more time with an analogy

Let's say you want to build a NASCAR race car. So, you build it, test it yourself and you have to submit your car's specs to the Rules committee. Your car passes, but a crew chief with 34 years experience calls you over and offers this advice:

a) you need to change the upper gear ratios
b) the front/rear weight distribution is off and a concern. Suggest you look hard there
c) your average RPM vs HP torque curve indicates a possible issue with the engine timing

What is your response?

A - Thank you for this info!
B - Well...ummm...but you never DROVE my car so how can you possibly say 'my car needs improvement'

I don't HAVE TO DRIVE THE CAR.
Citizen Klaus
GenusModu wrote:
Citizen Klaus wrote:
Alright, *setting aside* everything else, I'm interested in the LIBB and have a question about installation and retrofitting. Does anyone know what is the distance is between the mounting holes? I'm wondering if I could gut, say, an Arturia Rackbrute case and use one or two of these, instead (probably along with a new power input module).


Distance between the furthest LIBB mounting holes is 10.9 inches in the horizontal direction and 1.5 inches in the vertical direction.

Since the power connections are edge mounted, the total clerance requirements are larger than the board. A drilling and mounting template is provided on the web site and can be printed 1:1 on a legal size (8.5 x 14 inch) sheet.

http://www.genusmodu.com/files/LIBB/LIBB_A2_Mounting_Template.pdf

The LIBB specifications provide the minimum recommended clearance measurements: Minimum Clearance for side mounted power cable connectors, 3.90 inches by 13.20 inches (99.1 x 335.3 mm). This allows space for getting the module power connectors into the right angle mounted headers on LIBB.

You can easily fit one LIBB in a 3U or two LIBBS in a 6U Arturia Rackbrute case.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Thanks, John! Now I just need to scare up mounting-hole dimensions for the Rackbrute; I'm kind of hoping I won't have to drill new holes.
TemplarK
Maybe just ammend to "Best for switching psu's?"

edit - I'm not really caring just a suggestion
GenusModu
"Best" is a broad term that requires qualifiers to go with it. A flying bus cable is the best solution for many users because it only costs $15.

The Genus Modu web site states "Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy." I thought the "passive" part was obvious, but recently added the qualifier to be technically correct.

There is no reason to add a qualifier for linear or switching power supplies. LIBB is the quietest eurorack passive bus board solution for either type of power.

There has been much speculation and casting of doubts, by folks who don't design these things, that something was missed, but no technical arguments or cold hard data disproving anything. I continue to stand by my offer to respond to any technical concerns not already addressed in the Eurorack Power Distribution white paper.

The majority of the people reading this thread are smart enough to read past the uninformed speculation and form their own opinions. For those people who have taken the time to express their support and understanding for the white paper content, I do appreciate and thank you for your efforts.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
paults
Quote:
The Genus Modu web site states "Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy."


BUT WAIT!

You mean, that as a result of customer feedback, the text was changed per their request?

So, all this petty bickering about 'best' is over now?

My work here is done. It's peanut butter jelly time! Rockin' Banana! applause Guinness ftw!
TemplarK
GenusModu wrote:

There is no reason to add a qualifier for linear or switching power supplies. LIBB is the quietest eurorack passive bus board solution for either type of power.


Fair enough.
GenusModu
paults wrote:
Quote:
The Genus Modu web site states "Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy."


BUT WAIT!

You mean, that as a result of customer feedback, the text was changed per their request?

So, all this petty bickering about 'best' is over now?

My work here is done. It's peanut butter jelly time! Rockin' Banana! applause Guinness ftw!


Quietest bus board... was originally used at the web site, never "best."

So now we can start arguing about "quietest."
paults
Rather argue about 'passive' and 'bussboard'.

Or let's discuss shrouded headers?
GenusModu
paults wrote:
Rather argue about 'passive' and 'bussboard'.

Or let's discuss shrouded headers?


Bus bars or clean power are preferred topics for me.

John
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
paults wrote:
Quote:
The Genus Modu web site states "Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy."


BUT WAIT!

You mean, that as a result of customer feedback, the text was changed per their request?

So, all this petty bickering about 'best' is over now?

My work here is done. It's peanut butter jelly time! Rockin' Banana! applause Guinness ftw!


Quietest bus board... was originally used at the web site, never "best."

So now we can start arguing about "quietest."


No Paul, your "BEST" argument is one you've been having with yourself, attacking a straw man of your own making. No-one in this thread has made an issue out of it except you. Instead of addressing my questions about the white paper you carry on like a sarcastic child. At least one of my points got through and the anonymous quote on the website has now been amended to "quietest passive busboard".

My criticism was never directed at the product itself or the manufacturer but the credibility of the comparative tests. I have no doubt the LIBB does what it says on the tin. I have not argued (nor has anyone else) that you've a) faked the data, b) misled anyone with the data, c) altered the results of the data (another straw man argument of yours). My point has always been, without knowing more about what you have compared to, the LEVEL OF IMPROVEMENT between LIBB and competitor busboards, which is the whole point of the exercise, is not without question. You both know there is more to busboard design than copper thickness as evidenced below by quotes I plucked from the white paper. So the measured LEVEL OF IMPROVEMENT over flying cable and 1oz, 2oz and 4oz busboards without knowing more about the competitor boards is arguable. Pretty simple point that you've manged to avoid by making the argument about something else entirely.

Quote:
"With the 1 Ounce Copper Bus Board, results are better and similar to the reference equipment. The 4 Ounce Copper Bus Board also shows better results, though strangely has a worse response at lower frequencies than the 1 ounce board."


Quote:
"The exception was the 1 ounce copper bus board, which actually has higher resistance than the flying bus cable. This result deserves some further modeling and measurements as the 1 ounce copper results were somewhat better than expected."


Edit: Reduced size of quote for clarity.
Roy72
paults wrote:

because the data says: the LIBB is the BEST passive buss board when using switching power supplies as the driving voltage AND it's also the best when aggressor modules are present.


These statements are the core of my problem. Explain to me how if the DATA is saying LIBB is the best, how does the DATA help my choose between competitiors? Stick to the data, not patronising analogies that miss the point.
JohnLRice
I have no dog in this fight but I'll happily toss a sausage into the middle of it to see a reaction? hihi

I think detailed technical documentation is great and much appreciated but for most people it's going to fall under the category of either TLDR (too long didn't read) or TTDC (too technical didn't comprehend).

What I think would help potential customers would be either still shots or preferably video of an oscilloscope or other fancy pants visual analyzer where people could see and possibly hear the differences in at least noise? Maybe it's not feasible to do something like that for this product? Just a thought.

Of course for reasons already stated the brands/models of the comparison products wouldn't be revealed and then people might say:
"Yeah sure, the video looks convincing but how do we know that during the test John didn't set the competitor's boards on top of his car's alternator and Paul didn't drizzle DR. Pepper all over it?" hmmm..... seriously, i just don't get it lol
paults
Quote:
Stick to the data


Gladly.

First up: use of switchers in Euro

The main reason switchers are used has to do with something called the Low Voltage Directive. This was originally authored by UL, a private US corporation that the US government has authorized (but is no part of) to regulate electrical safety.

Essentially, the LVD states that if an OEM uses a UL-listed DC-output power supply that outputs (I think) 37VDC or less, then the equipment itself (a la a synth case) does not in and of itself need to be UL listed.

Pre1998 or so, there were many UL "equivalents" around the world: VDE, CSA, IEC, etc. Now, it's pretty much UL in North America, CE in Europe and who know what elsewhere.

So, why is UL such a "big deal"? Because the way the laws are set up (again talking North America now), states (and in some cases, cities) can ban the sell of non-UL listed equipment. Also, the courts 'look harshly' on non-UL listed equipment and triple damages are usually in play if say, your non-UL Christmas lights fail and burn the house down. Now, this does NOT mean UL registration is REQUIRED. It just means that UL has given OEMs a 'loophole' with the LVD, and that is used.

Switchers work by rectifying the incoming AC line voltage and then 'chopping it up" via PWM (mostly) at frequencies from 250KHz to 1MHz (again, usually). The issue for audio stuff is that this PWM noise cannot be 100% removed, and removal is $$$ in terms of size and cost, so the power supply manufacturers tend to apply minimal filtering.

The result is say a +15VDC supply output, but it has a 500Khz, 400mv pk-pk noise signal added to it as well.

Now, the initial reaction of.....errr....[cough].....most people is along the lines of "Well, that's such a high frequency, it really shouldn't matter". And that is both correct AND incorrect. Because it's not the DIRECT result of the switching noise that is an issue. If you want to know what, maybe start reading up (I can't do ALL the work, ya know).

Now, a linear supply also rectifies the AC (usually at a lower voltage via a transformer) and so you have either 100Hz or 120Hz 'ripple', which is based on the load and the capacitance of the system (and to the wiring drop if high current). This is called 'hum' in a broad generic sense. But, the "good news" is that this is such a low frequency that it's relative easy to get rid of (and has been easy since the 70s).

But the switching noise is VERY VERY VERY hard to get rid of. Some of it is the higher frequencies, but a lot of it is called 'high dI/dt' problems (which is a derivative of the change of current in the circuit over time). Where in a linear supply, if you follow something called a Schade Curve and have a good servo loop, ripple is easy. In a switcher, it is not so simple.

What you have to do instead is have a power distribution that is BOTH

a) low resistance
b) low impedance

Low resistance is to not INCREASE the overall noise due to the resistance of the interconnect. But low resistance does nothing for that switcher noise. NOTHING.

What you need is a AC path to ground. And not just SOME AC path, a precise, calculated, wide-band path to ground. This is mostly the design effort in the LIBB.

Now, what does the NUMBERS MEAN?

Lower is better.

Meaning, if a Meanwell 'cheese grater' $27 supply off eBay is spewing 250mv of switcher noise going INTO the LIBB, and we measure only 10mv coming OUT to the MODULE, that means the LIBB did in fact reduce the noise.

Now, a perfectly fair question is: well, how much noise is "too much" noise?

And the answer is: there is absolutely no way of knowing that.

Which IN TURN means: lower is better, so we want a solution that feeds the LOWEST POSSIBLE (repeat.....LOWEST POSSIBLE) switching noise into your modules.

And this is what the LIBB does. It acts as a switching noise filter.

So, if you look at the data presented, there is no current solution TOPOLOGY (not specific brand, talking overall design TECHNIQUE) that filters out more switching noise than LIBB.

For folks looking at bussbars: this is actually the WORST POSSIBLE power distribution system for EITHER

a) switcher AC input supplies
b) digital 'aggressor' modules, or even analog modules with LEDs

If you have specific questions about the data, please let us know.
GenusModu
The 1 ounce and 4 ounce copper bus boards were the typical dual sided copper bus strip type design with vertical headers, if that helps anyone. I'll add that to the white paper. Again that seemed pretty obvious since 90-95% of the passive bus boards are the bus strip type.

John
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
The 1 ounce and 4 ounce copper bus boards were the typical dual sided copper bus strip type design with vertical headers, if that helps anyone. I'll add that to the white paper. Again that seemed pretty obvious since 90-95% of the passive bus boards are the bus strip type.


More useful would be to add the type and position of the PSU connector. As you know, a busboard with it's PSU connection in the center of the board will effectively half the resistance to the furthest IDC header and some busboards even use IDC connectors for connection to the PSU which obviously are a poor choice for their high contact resistance. At the end of the day you are asking the reader to trust your choice of competitor busboards from which you are making the comparison which begs the question why produce such a detailed white paper in the first place when ultimately you are asking for trust? I already trust that LIBB is the best effort yet when it comes to passive busboards (I can see that by looking at it) but how much improvement it offers will differ from system to system depending on the selection of modules and the quality of the PSU.

Now, your tests show better results in many cases for the 4oz busboard (without caps) compared to the other 1oz/2oz busboards so the improvement here could only be put down to lower resistance. IIRC the 2oz (or was it the 1oz?) had caps but apparently not enough to make any remarkable difference to the results so we can see that lower resistance in itself is contributing to better performance.

Let's take for example Elby Designs busboards which are very popular among euro users and have been for years. Their passive ED704 is a 1oz/4 layer board with two layers dedicated to 0V. It uses a different topology where the pins of each header directly tap off their respective common rail rather than the tracks running through each header. This allows for lower resistance compared to a typical bus strip.

My point is, testing LIBB against competitor busboards known to be poor by design obviously increases the visible improvements in your graphs where I feel the amount of improvement would not have been so great if you'd tested against passive boards that are better by design.

The white paper sets out to show us how much improvement can be seen over competitor products. You are giving us comparisons to the most typical examples and that is definitely a valid comparison but I think potential customers would be more interested in seeing the difference between LIBB and some of the better passive busboards already on the market otherwise the degree of improvement over competitor products could be seen to be exaggerated. If I were in the market for a passive bus I'd want to know how much improvement I could expect over the next best solutions, that way I could justify spending the extra on LIBB.

My involvement in this thread started out in response to someone accusing other busboard manufacturers of refusing to show their data as if they had something to hide. I followed up by asking if it were possible to measure with/without caps as that was what I was most interested in. If it weren't for Paul's ridiculous responses I would've left it at that.

John, you have gone above and beyond in your testing and I think there is definite value in the data but ultimately you are asking for trust ('trust us on our selection of competitor busboards', 'trust us we're EE's') which is really no different to what anyone else is doing (minus the white paper). The idea that other manufacturers now have to go to such lengths in order to validate their claims when one can simply design a busboard using good practice and know it's better than a typical bus strip is over the top imo. You yourself have said you can tell LIBB is better than a competitor's busboard by looking at it. All that aside, the white paper is very informative and does indeed show how LIBB can improve system performance.
paults
I'm still trying to figure out how data can be presented WITHOUT NAMING the competition.

So, you start by:

a) listing who you think have the 'better bussboards' to test (assuming we didn't already test them)

b) tell us why these particular ones are better (ie how do you KNOW they are better?)

It makes ZERO sense to publish LIBB results without caps. because the caps are integral to the overall impedance. Why don't you buy a LIBB and run these tests yourself?

In a non-Muff world, and if Euro was more like "industry", it would be possible to have a nice tidy spreadsheet listing 59 bussboard test results.

But as we all know (including you), the 58 people not "on top" would yell SLAGGING at the top of their lungs. Like they've been doing to me, I dunno.....since 1996 or so when I was called a liar when I said I had 20,000 CEM ICs. But I digress.

The solution you seek is an easy one: each bussboard/power supply provider should buy the equipment, learn what a 50ohm SMA connector is for, make the measurements for THEIR system and publish THEIR results. Then, a "third party" with no horse in the race can make that spreadsheet. So no implication of 'tainting'.

Easy-Peasy.

I patiently wait for such results.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out how data can be presented WITHOUT NAMING the competition.


Copper weight, number of layers, number of headers, PSU connector type, PSU connector position (end or center), PCB dimensions.

paults wrote:
It makes ZERO sense to publish LIBB results without caps. because the caps are integral to the overall impedance.


No it doesn't. It would definitively prove your claim of low impedance vs low resistance without having to compare to unknown busboards, slag competitors or ask the reader to trust you coz you're an EE. In fact it's the only way you can prove it (you don't need to prove it to me btw). Seriously, I'm trying to help you here. Besides, John has already said he'd like to conduct the test but it's not a high priority atm.

paults wrote:
The solution you seek is an easy one: each bussboard/power supply provider should buy the equipment, learn what a 50ohm SMA connector is for, make the measurements for THEIR system and publish THEIR results. Then, a "third party" with no horse in the race can make that spreadsheet. So no implication of 'tainting'.


I have already offered to send my new board to John for comparative testing but he declined. In time I will publish my own test results but don't expect to see a white paper/comparative test from me (for reasons mentioned above).
slow_riot
paults wrote:


For folks looking at bussbars: this is actually the WORST POSSIBLE power distribution system for EITHER

a) switcher AC input supplies
b) digital 'aggressor' modules, or even analog modules with LEDs



As yet Paul the LIBB has not yet earned feedback from customers who have seen improvements in SNR, whereas busbars have won high praise from professional and other clients, including those with digital modules with high assymetric power draw. Failing to include them in your tests amongst a marketing whirlwind which lavish so much hyperbola on yourselves that trading standards could intervene does not inspire confidence.

I would love to see a good SMPSU on the market because I do live in the real world where musicians want something small they can fit in their backpacks, but as yef the proof will come from user results. A wise person said that they don't talk about themselves on the internet because other people's words have the most power to effect public perception.

I would prefer to see the context you have suggested made more obvious in your marketing, that the LIBB is not designed solely for minimising the effects of common impedance coupling, but that it is designed also for high effective capacitance for reducing SMPSU ripple (although I don't see how it can outperform an active busboard because of the high L of cable interconnects). In terms of your claims of highest SNR on the market, the first elephant in the room is that any supply/distribution that continues to use ribbons will be limited by them. The second is that SMPSUs themselves have been problematic in a format with very low RF immunity, and some analogue designs with very low PSRR.
mskala
slow_riot wrote:
A wise person said that they don't talk about themselves on the internet because other people's words have the most power to affect public perception.


thumbs up

As I've said before and will say until it sinks in: comparison testing needs to be independent.
paults
Quote:
As yet Paul the LIBB has not yet earned feedback from customers who have seen improvements in SNR, whereas busbars have won high praise from professional and other clients, including those with digital modules with high assymetric power draw. Failing to include them in your tests amongst a marketing whirlwind which lavish so much hyperbola on yourselves that trading standards could intervene does not inspire confidence.


I think you are referring specifically to Hinton. And, the praise is probably from the total use of his linear supply + the bussbars, as opposed to placing switchers on JUST the bussbars.

Again (for the 7th time): bussbars do NOTHING for reducing switcher noise. If you think this is true, please show me a SPICE simulation, or actual test results. Or, maybe you should, I dunno......ASK HIM?

And as an aside, what % of the total Euro case market has Hinton systems? Asking for a friend. Are they carried by a dealer network?

Quote:
As I've said before and will say until it sinks in: comparison testing needs to be independent.


OK, then YOU spend $20-30,000 for the equipment and then YOU do it. I'll wait patiently over here.

Whether or not the non-EEs want to hear it or not (because after 38 years in this profession, I have never, and I mean NEVER EVEN CLOSE, seen so many non-EEs trying to do EE things), there are ways to do things and just because these things run COUNTER to their hobby/business, doesn't invalidate the work.

If you feel suspicious about ANYTHING I've said, then PROVE ME WRONG. This is how the profession is SUPPOSED to work. If I claim A, then YOU run the tests and it either supports A or you say A is full of crap.

If you really believe a bussbar system reduces switcher noise, then PROVE ME WRONG. I'll wait patiently over here.

Saying I THINK YOU'RE WRONG is not getting anywhere, is it? Saying YEAH BUT... isn't working, either.
slow_riot
paults wrote:
Quote:
As yet Paul the LIBB has not yet earned feedback from customers who have seen improvements in SNR, whereas busbars have won high praise from professional and other clients, including those with digital modules with high assymetric power draw. Failing to include them in your tests amongst a marketing whirlwind which lavish so much hyperbola on yourselves that trading standards could intervene does not inspire confidence.


I think you are referring specifically to Hinton. And, the praise is probably from the total use of his linear supply + the bussbars, as opposed to placing switchers on JUST the bussbars.

Again (for the 7th time): bussbars do NOTHING for reducing switcher noise. If you think this is true, please show me a SPICE simulation, or actual test results.

And as an aside, what % of the total Euro case market has Hinton systems? Asking for a friend. Are they carried by a dealer network?



A large proportion of the success of the Hinton system is the distribution, which offers the lowest DC resistance on the market ( check the measurements), especially combined with better connectors than ribbons.

I have not neglected to mention the effective capacitance of a multilayer PCB solution being potentially higher, but in addressing the highest SNR portion of the market, where linear supplies have proven themselves, this feature does not help those customers, and the claims about "quietest" should be qualified with the proper context.

Dismissing a product on account of sales does not help your claims about having higher performance.
paults
I 100% agree, that low resistance is needed, in EITHER SMPS or linear.

There is a % contribution, which is proportional to load, of the TOTAL 'ripple' (I don't like that descriptor in a SMPS, but.....).

However, when using SMPS as the DC source from the wall, having ONLY a low resistance will not help the SMPS noise.

Would it surprise you that my R&D Euro cause uses linear supplies?

I simply bring up the point about Hinton's "market penetration" because it's an outlier for 99.9999% of the Euro cases. And, for now the 8th time: I don't HAVE to test it to know it's not going to perform like LIBB.

I don't HAVE to physically race a top fuel dragster in my Honda Civic to know it will beat me in the 1/4mi.

Again: please ASK HIM about it.

Also: all we are saying is the LIBB is the 'top performing' passive bussboard. Nothing about OVERALL quiet Euro power solutions. Just the bussboard part.
stephentrask
Well, that was one shit show of a thread. In the end, this makes me want the LIBB.
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
The 1 ounce and 4 ounce copper bus boards were the typical dual sided copper bus strip type design with vertical headers, if that helps anyone. I'll add that to the white paper. Again that seemed pretty obvious since 90-95% of the passive bus boards are the bus strip type.


More useful would be to add the type and position of the PSU connector. As you know, a busboard with it's PSU connection in the center of the board will effectively half the resistance to the furthest IDC header and some busboards even use IDC connectors for connection to the PSU which obviously are a poor choice for their high contact resistance. At the end of the day you are asking the reader to trust your choice of competitor busboards from which you are making the comparison which begs the question why produce such a detailed white paper in the first place when ultimately you are asking for trust? I already trust that LIBB is the best effort yet when it comes to passive busboards (I can see that by looking at it) but how much improvement it offers will differ from system to system depending on the selection of modules and the quality of the PSU.

Now, your tests show better results in many cases for the 4oz busboard (without caps) compared to the other 1oz/2oz busboards so the improvement here could only be put down to lower resistance. IIRC the 2oz (or was it the 1oz?) had caps but apparently not enough to make any remarkable difference to the results so we can see that lower resistance in itself is contributing to better performance.

Let's take for example Elby Designs busboards which are very popular among euro users and have been for years. Their passive ED704 is a 1oz/4 layer board with two layers dedicated to 0V. It uses a different topology where the pins of each header directly tap off their respective common rail rather than the tracks running through each header. This allows for lower resistance compared to a typical bus strip.

My point is, testing LIBB against competitor busboards known to be poor by design obviously increases the visible improvements in your graphs where I feel the amount of improvement would not have been so great if you'd tested against passive boards that are better by design.

The white paper sets out to show us how much improvement can be seen over competitor products. You are giving us comparisons to the most typical examples and that is definitely a valid comparison but I think potential customers would be more interested in seeing the difference between LIBB and some of the better passive busboards already on the market otherwise the degree of improvement over competitor products could be seen to be exaggerated. If I were in the market for a passive bus I'd want to know how much improvement I could expect over the next best solutions, that way I could justify spending the extra on LIBB.

My involvement in this thread started out in response to someone accusing other busboard manufacturers of refusing to show their data as if they had something to hide. I followed up by asking if it were possible to measure with/without caps as that was what I was most interested in. If it weren't for Paul's ridiculous responses I would've left it at that.

John, you have gone above and beyond in your testing and I think there is definite value in the data but ultimately you are asking for trust ('trust us on our selection of competitor busboards', 'trust us we're EE's') which is really no different to what anyone else is doing (minus the white paper). The idea that other manufacturers now have to go to such lengths in order to validate their claims when one can simply design a busboard using good practice and know it's better than a typical bus strip is over the top imo. You yourself have said you can tell LIBB is better than a competitor's busboard by looking at it. All that aside, the white paper is very informative and does indeed show how LIBB can improve system performance.


Ian,

The board specifics are right there in the white paper, this section:

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#res_measurements

A difference of a few inches in board length will not make much difference in the results. I did cover in detail the wire connections in the first section as those do make a difference, so that info was there as well. As noted in the resistance measurement section, I covered "common" bus types plus LIBB. There are handfuls of 2 and 3 ounce boards that are not included either. I did not purposely cover boards known to be poor in design, I covered the most common ranges so people can see how much improvment, or not, is possible with them. Ignoring flying bus cables or 1 ounce boards would have left the majority of people with no idea of how much improvement can be made beyond those solutions.

The 4 ounce board I tested is one of the best solutions in the market. The Elby 704 is a less common type of design and I congratulate Laurie Biddulph on trying something different.

The improvement delta between bus solutions is not going to change that much just because the module configuration or PSU changes. What will change is the baseline noise for a given configuration. I tried to make that clear in the white paper.

A bus board spec is not as clear cut as a power supply spec. I recommend a measurement of maximum resistance for ground and the power rails from power feed to the worst case euro header, not some exhaustive test of module configurations and waveform and spectrum plots as in the white paper. Resistance measurements are simple enough to do with a $100 milliohmeter from ebay, you just need to know how to calibrate it for the 20 mohm range. Or feed a stiff current through the board and measure the voltage drop. I have seen a few recent boards with published measurements. That is a good trend that I hope continues.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out how data can be presented WITHOUT NAMING the competition.


Copper weight, number of layers, number of headers, PSU connector type, PSU connector position (end or center), PCB dimensions.

paults wrote:
It makes ZERO sense to publish LIBB results without caps. because the caps are integral to the overall impedance.


No it doesn't. It would definitively prove your claim of low impedance vs low resistance without having to compare to unknown busboards, slag competitors or ask the reader to trust you coz you're an EE. In fact it's the only way you can prove it (you don't need to prove it to me btw). Seriously, I'm trying to help you here. Besides, John has already said he'd like to conduct the test but it's not a high priority atm.

paults wrote:
The solution you seek is an easy one: each bussboard/power supply provider should buy the equipment, learn what a 50ohm SMA connector is for, make the measurements for THEIR system and publish THEIR results. Then, a "third party" with no horse in the race can make that spreadsheet. So no implication of 'tainting'.


I have already offered to send my new board to John for comparative testing but he declined. In time I will publish my own test results but don't expect to see a white paper/comparative test from me (for reasons mentioned above).


Ian,

The level of information you request on bus boards would identify every one of them, while for the most part not make much difference in results.

The difference between low resistance and low impedance is already in the white paper, you just need to look for it. Look at the spectrum results for the Attenuverter Ouptut Noise Spectrum. Look especially at the peaks at 10 KHz, 16 KHz and 45 KHz. Look at the difference in those peaks for flying bus cable, 1 oz bus board and 4 oz bus board. Well actually there is no difference, despite the changes in copper and resistance. Now look at LIBB, it is 11 to 15 dB lower for those frequencies. That is the impact of low impedance accomplished through effective capacitance, for an output module that is dominated by power bus noise. It is not limited to frequencies beyond the audio range, it also works in the upper audio range.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#results04

You don't have to believe Paul or I about caps vs no caps design. Any recent text on power integrity or power delivery networks will tell you the same thing.

As I recall the offer was to send me the forthcoming Amalgamod design to critique. I don't believe it was available at the time of the tests. I don't want to look at anyone's pre-release info or provide a blow by blow critique of a product. If I see something released that concerns me, I will test it.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
A bus board spec is not as clear cut as a power supply spec. I recommend a measurement of maximum resistance for ground and the power rails from power feed to the worst case euro header, not some exhaustive test of module configurations and waveform and spectrum plots as in the white paper. Resistance measurements are simple enough to do with a $100 milliohmeter from ebay, you just need to know how to calibrate it for the 20 mohm range. Or feed a stiff current through the board and measure the voltage drop. I have seen a few recent boards with published measurements. That is a good trend that I hope continues.


Absolutely.

GenusModu wrote:
You don't have to believe Paul or I about caps vs no caps design. Any recent text on power integrity or power delivery networks will tell you the same thing.


Like I've said, it's not me you need to convince. Showing the results of LIBB with/without caps would put it to bed once and for all which is why I suggested it in the first place, not because I didn't believe you. No slagging, no independent testing, no comparative testing, no white paper, no 'trust us we're EE's', no $30k equipment, no back and forth required.

To take a leaf out of Paul's book here's a car analogy: If I wanted to show how my turbo charger increased performance over not having a turbo I'd use the exact same car with/without the turbo, not compare it to other cars without turbo but that are also inferior by design. Sorry I can't think how to explain it in terms of dog breeding but I think you get my point. I am/was trying to help you get your point across which without the various straw man comebacks or being accused of trying to promote my shit in your thread, trying to ruin your business and whatever else by those in the peanut gallery, would've been done and dusted long ago.
paults
If the caps are removed, it's not a Low Impedance buss board.

Back to a car analogy: if I take the tires off my car, I don't have to trailer it to the drag strip and see if I can win a race. I kinda know the outcome, and I don't have to measure 'anything'. I understand cars and tires enough, and to me it's pointless.

We tested several bussboards that are not low impedance, and posted the results.

What POSSIBLE use, for LIBB sales & marketing, would this accomplish EXACTLY? Except to prove to YOU what a cap does? Hint: -1/jwC
Dogma
So can you test the LIBB with caps? Doesnt that change it?

Just so you three guys know its helping no-one work out what is preferable and muddying already muddied water...
paults
The LIBB is sold with lots of caps on it. Very specific caps, arranged in a very specific way.

A capacitor has an impedance, which can be thought of as a change of resistance based on the value of the cap and the frequency.

Small ceramic caps also exhibit something called SRF (self-resonant frequency), which is also important.

If you want to get all EE-like:

https://www.murata.com/en-us/products/emiconfun/capacitor/2013/02/14/e n-20130214-p1
GenusModu
Dogma wrote:
So can you test the LIBB with caps? Doesnt that change it?

Just so you three guys know its helping no-one work out what is preferable and muddying already muddied water...


LIBB is tested with the same caps that it ships with. This question shows why I shouldn't post LIBB results without caps, because the next questions I'll be getting are "do I get the LIBB with or without caps" or worse some casual readers will think the the results without caps are what they'll get without even asking the question.

John
BugBrand
It'd be interesting & indicative if you could run & publish such a test, but I can understand why you say its not necessary.
Dogma
Ill hit you up re a couple of LIBBS for a control skiff im building....
TemplarK
Please no more analogies.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
What POSSIBLE use, for LIBB sales & marketing, would this accomplish EXACTLY? Except to prove to YOU what a cap does? Hint: -1/jwC


I know what a bloody cap does! How many times have I said this?!?! You keep saying low resistance distribution such as busbars do absolutely nothing for SMPSU's or aggressor modules. I'm saying it would be helpful if you could illustrate this in a controlled test rather than repeating this over and over. CRIKEY!! The fact that this has been so difficult to get this through to you makes me wonder whether you're playing with me.

GenusModu wrote:
Dogma wrote:
So can you test the LIBB with caps? Doesnt that change it?

Just so you three guys know its helping no-one work out what is preferable and muddying already muddied water...


LIBB is tested with the same caps that it ships with. This question shows why I shouldn't post LIBB results without caps, because the next questions I'll be getting are "do I get the LIBB with or without caps" or worse some casual readers will think the the results without caps are what they'll get without even asking the question.


Good point, although the same could be said for publishing a white paper at all when evidently most of it is beyond the end users comprehension. MY ASS IS BLEEDINGMY ASS IS BLEEDINGMY ASS IS BLEEDING
Dogma
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:
What POSSIBLE use, for LIBB sales & marketing, would this accomplish EXACTLY? Except to prove to YOU what a cap does? Hint: -1/jwC


I know what a bloody cap does! How many times have I said this?!?! You keep saying low resistance distribution such as busbars do absolutely nothing for SMPSU's or aggressor modules. I'm saying it would be helpful if you could illustrate this in a controlled test rather than repeating this over and over. CRIKEY!! The fact that this has been so difficult to get this through to you makes me wonder whether you're playing with me.

GenusModu wrote:
Dogma wrote:
So can you test the LIBB with caps? Doesnt that change it?

Just so you three guys know its helping no-one work out what is preferable and muddying already muddied water...


LIBB is tested with the same caps that it ships with. This question shows why I shouldn't post LIBB results without caps, because the next questions I'll be getting are "do I get the LIBB with or without caps" or worse some casual readers will think the the results without caps are what they'll get without even asking the question.


Good point, although the same could be said for publishing a white paper at all when evidently most of it is beyond the end users comprehension. MY ASS IS BLEEDINGMY ASS IS BLEEDINGMY ASS IS BLEEDING


applause

some may get it some may not....but theres nothing new going on here. Simple electronics..... but it does show a concern and a depth of knowledge thats impressive.
Whether it shows what you want it to show is really by the by - and if it doesnt show what you want and its that important do some tests on your boards Ian....

All i know is from personal experience. I find my linear system much better all round and for everything but convience (travel rig) id never go back to a Cincon/expensive brick
hippasus
Let's said that one would like to start a new case for traveling. What will be the recommended PSU to get the best performance from the LIBB?
shiftybits
Wow. I've just read this thread in its entirety (up to the time I'm writing this) in one sitting. It's a lot to take in, and although I rarely respond to threads on this forum, I find this one very interesting.

John and Paul:
I'm not an EE, but I am a software engineer with many years of experience across many systems. Engineering for long enough breeds a ton of resentment, which I've felt a lot of in this thread. I feel your frustration, honestly. That said, combatting difficult situations by falling back on the "you don't know, you aren't an EE" (paraphrasing a theme that is blatantly obvious in this thread) does not help, ever. If people want to one-up you or prove you wrong, just let them try. Who cares? If they are full of s***, they will prove that themselves. If they aren't, and we all learn something new, it only benefits us all. If they don't accept the amount of data provided, and won't acquire the data themselves (as an engineer would), it's OK! You are in a difficult position of trying to push something forward in a niche market full of opinions. I applaud your efforts, and do hope it works out for you.

And, honestly, it's a good thing that non-EE's are interested and excited about this stuff. Who cares if they don't know what you know? Show them. Your whitepaper is a good start towards doing that. Otherwise the knowledge will eventually be lost. We should strive to avoid that.

Anyways, I don't want/need to lecture at you...I'm sure you know all this already, and having been in your position hundreds or maybe thousands of times in a different context, I can't say I've always taken my own advice.

I find the LIBB appealing, and as a hobbyist I'm excited to build a system with something on this tier. It's definitely now on my shortlist for a build this summer. I hope it succeeds and the user feedback and data will speak for itself!
GenusModu
hippasus wrote:
Let's said that one would like to start a new case for traveling. What will be the recommended PSU to get the best performance from the LIBB?


Once it starts shipping I will be recommending the SynthTech Little and Big Stinker power supplies for portable cases.

John
GenusModu
shiftybits wrote:
Wow. I've just read this thread in its entirety (up to the time I'm writing this) in one sitting. It's a lot to take in, and although I rarely respond to threads on this forum, I find this one very interesting.

John and Paul:
I'm not an EE, but I am a software engineer with many years of experience across many systems. Engineering for long enough breeds a ton of resentment, which I've felt a lot of in this thread. I feel your frustration, honestly. That said, combatting difficult situations by falling back on the "you don't know, you aren't an EE" (paraphrasing a theme that is blatantly obvious in this thread) does not help, ever. If people want to one-up you or prove you wrong, just let them try. Who cares? If they are full of s***, they will prove that themselves. If they aren't, and we all learn something new, it only benefits us all. If they don't accept the amount of data provided, and won't acquire the data themselves (as an engineer would), it's OK! You are in a difficult position of trying to push something forward in a niche market full of opinions. I applaud your efforts, and do hope it works out for you.

And, honestly, it's a good thing that non-EE's are interested and excited about this stuff. Who cares if they don't know what you know? Show them. Your whitepaper is a good start towards doing that. Otherwise the knowledge will eventually be lost. We should strive to avoid that.

Anyways, I don't want/need to lecture at you...I'm sure you know all this already, and having been in your position hundreds or maybe thousands of times in a different context, I can't say I've always taken my own advice.

I find the LIBB appealing, and as a hobbyist I'm excited to build a system with something on this tier. It's definitely now on my shortlist for a build this summer. I hope it succeeds and the user feedback and data will speak for itself!


Shiftybits,

This is not about EEs vs. non-EEs. It is about folks who try to absorb the information and educate themselves if need be, and those who don't. There have been EEs and non-EEs on both sides of this.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
slow_riot
That's a little black and white John. You are implying that you have a product so revolutionary only you can understand it, when it really isn't the case. It's a promising solution but the claims in the marketing are as yet unproven and it's reasonable for them to be put under the spotlight given their boldness.

One weakness is that this distribution is not expandable like a bus bar, even with a star distribution the common impedance between multiple boards will be just as high as anything else currently available. This does not impact noise voltages appearing as a result of module power draw, but in an unbalanced system where return current when patching between modules flows through the OV it is another mechanism for crosstalk.
2disbetter
GenusModu wrote:
hippasus wrote:
Let's said that one would like to start a new case for traveling. What will be the recommended PSU to get the best performance from the LIBB?


Once it starts shipping I will be recommending the SynthTech Little and Big Stinker power supplies for portable cases.

John


Any idea when that might be? Or when we'll get a product announcement for it?
I'm interested in any power product that strives to do a better job that is currently being done.

2d
paults
Quote:
claims in the marketing are as yet unproven


What 'claims' are you referring to, exactly? Every measurement is backed up.

Quote:
difficult situations by falling back on the "you don't know, you aren't an EE"


If you carefully look at my posts, where I do this as a 'last resort' , it's because the people I'm speaking to ARE NOT LISTENING. Or rather, they simply have some sort of cognitive dissonance going on.

John & I had had hours of prior discussion about how to 'market' (there is the #2 trigger word in Euro, besides 'best') this bussboard. And, ironically, things have proceeded EXACTLY as I predicted here.

The overall 'story arc' is that unless you have a level of technical expertise (EE or not, doesn't matter as long as it's CORRECT) try to 'understand the numbers' will be difficult. But it's the SAME difficulty as me not understanding how a heart-lung transplant is done. I've never studied it [shrug].

What happens in these sort of EEs versus the world threads is that

a) the average person asks things
b) the EE answers
c) the person, either pushes back (typical) or says to themselves "Hmmmm......I need to read up on this"

I want you to go back and count how may time I've said a low RESISTANCE is NOT HELPING a switcher-based power system OR a system that has Euro aggressor modules.

Then, go back and see where people then IGNORE that, without ANY, and I do mean ANY counter data. Rather, they want us to "prove it". When there is nothing to "prove".

I want you to go back and see where the LIBB is 'snake oil' because of the 'best' which I guess in people's mind is like a 'best' $3000 HDMI Monster cable?

Go back and look at my comments about CLAIMS versus MEASUREMENTS.

If you look at how I phrase, WHEN I phrase them, and not just a "Paul is a EE pissant a-hole" it's because people are choosing not to "believe me" I guess is the term I'm looking for.

We have really bent over backwards to explain how LIBB works, why is better that anything out there, but I guess there are competitors here that will automatically dig in their heels. Or, INSTEAD, maybe say to yourself: these 2 guys REALLY UNDERSTAND this issue. I can really LEARN SOMETHING from them. I need to STUDY more.

Because, this is what we EEs do. We listen, and we ADJUST OUR THINKING, and we learn.

It's OK to question us, we WANT you to. But on the other hand, listen to what we are saying, OK?
slow_riot
From the website: "LIBB brings modern engineering science to Eurorack power distribution, providing the quietest system you can possibly build and record. " There are plenty of other allusions to this claim too.

Noise and interference modalities can be incredibly complex in audio systems and claims like this muddy the water. Please do not take this as an affront to the engineering, as the format is desperate for innovation in power supply and distribution for those who cannot bear the cost/weight of a linear supply with bus bars, but there is simply no way for this claim to be supported.
paults
Quote:
but there is simply no way for this claim to be supported


I guess this is where 38 pages of measurements don't mean anything. Thanks for clearing this up.

Please explain how a low RESISTANCE system (linear + bussbars) will not be more noisy when I load the case with 7 aggressor modules and 4 victims, than a LIBB?

I await your detailed EE analysis. Please provide SPICE models, measurement data and so on.

Remember: the way science works is:

a) we publish finding
b) if you disagree, then YOU run your OWN tests
c) then YOU publish the data

We went first. Who will step up and refute? I'll wait over here.

[see, how my tone has changed, when someone CLAIMS something in a TECHNICAL discussion WITHOUT any PROOF?]
starthief
Just ordered one from Control. thumbs up

I won't say I understand more than a small fraction of the technical details, but I think some people have gone well beyond healthy skepticism and into chemtrails and Time Cube territory seriously, i just don't get it

My thought process is this:

1. My rack has an okay bus board on top, but it's from a company I will never spend another dime on. There's also a rat's nest of flying bus cables daisy-chained to each other for the bottom two rows. Even though I don't have a serious noise problem, the hackiness of it irritates me.

2. There are cheap, minimal bus boards... which even the manufacturers don't claim are any better than a mess of flying bus cables. "Better" ones seem to have active electronics and are made for specific PSUs, and/or aren't available anymore. Busbars are crazy overkill for me IMHO.

3. For $40 more than the cheapest, most disposable-seeming bus board out there, I can get a LIBB, which I'm convinced is probably pretty damned good.

4. I'd have bought one several weeks ago, but didn't realize the EHA (Euro Header Adapter) existed, and figured I'd have to get into risky DIY or replace my PSU at the same time. But it does exist and that takes the pain away.
2disbetter
slow_riot wrote:
... for those who cannot bear the cost/weight of a linear supply with bus bars, but there is simply no way for this claim to be supported.


It really isn't the cost or the weight of a linear power supply or bus bars, it's the practicality. I'm not trying to have a large heavy trunk of a instrument that doesn't move well or permit much flexibility in the case I choose.

starthief wrote:
Just ordered one from Control. thumbs up


Pretty much my same thoughts, with the addition that I believe the LIBB and other more thoughtfully thought out power solutions just are more adaptable to cases and situations than linear/buss bars. Also given my preference for digital modules, I'm keen to find solutions that help to deal with that as well.

2d
paults
Quote:
are more adaptable to cases and situations than linear/buss bars


As a registered PE that has extensive dealing with UL, I simply will not directly tell people to use a linear supply.

I will say things like "they have much lower noise than a switcher solution".

The reason is: safety. You have to wire it up, at some interconnection point, to the wall outlet. And, if you (and I'll just say just about everyone) have no idea what VW-1, creepage/UL840, or UL1013 means, that's the reason(s).

As an aside, as far as I am aware, there are no UL-listed AC-wall input Euro supplies/cases.
slow_riot
Paul I don't have the complete phase and impedance measurements of a bus bar system from supply to module including the interconnects, but no such measurement exists for the LIBB either, despite your insistence on this as the USP. I also would have been interested to see you demonstrate this claim by including a bus bar system in your measurement data for comparison.
shiftybits
paults wrote:


Quote:
difficult situations by falling back on the "you don't know, you aren't an EE"


If you carefully look at my posts, where I do this as a 'last resort' , it's because the people I'm speaking to ARE NOT LISTENING. Or rather, they simply have some sort of cognitive dissonance going on.

John & I had had hours of prior discussion about how to 'market' (there is the #2 trigger word in Euro, besides 'best') this bussboard. And, ironically, things have proceeded EXACTLY as I predicted here.

The overall 'story arc' is that unless you have a level of technical expertise (EE or not, doesn't matter as long as it's CORRECT) try to 'understand the numbers' will be difficult. But it's the SAME difficulty as me not understanding how a heart-lung transplant is done. I've never studied it [shrug].

What happens in these sort of EEs versus the world threads is that

a) the average person asks things
b) the EE answers
c) the person, either pushes back (typical) or says to themselves "Hmmmm......I need to read up on this"

I want you to go back and count how may time I've said a low RESISTANCE is NOT HELPING a switcher-based power system OR a system that has Euro aggressor modules.

Then, go back and see where people then IGNORE that, without ANY, and I do mean ANY counter data. Rather, they want us to "prove it". When there is nothing to "prove".

I want you to go back and see where the LIBB is 'snake oil' because of the 'best' which I guess in people's mind is like a 'best' $3000 HDMI Monster cable?

Go back and look at my comments about CLAIMS versus MEASUREMENTS.

If you look at how I phrase, WHEN I phrase them, and not just a "Paul is a EE pissant a-hole" it's because people are choosing not to "believe me" I guess is the term I'm looking for.

We have really bent over backwards to explain how LIBB works, why is better that anything out there, but I guess there are competitors here that will automatically dig in their heels. Or, INSTEAD, maybe say to yourself: these 2 guys REALLY UNDERSTAND this issue. I can really LEARN SOMETHING from them. I need to STUDY more.

Because, this is what we EEs do. We listen, and we ADJUST OUR THINKING, and we learn.

It's OK to question us, we WANT you to. But on the other hand, listen to what we are saying, OK?


Well, as I've said, I understand that frustration. My post was from a position of empathy more than anything. I'm not going to argue with you over it, and I'm not going to reread this whole thread again and count how many times you've pointed out the importance of low impedance vs. just low resistance for certain situations. I got that point on the first read. That was actually new information for me, and I appreciate learning it.

This thread overall has a lot of information from multiple sources, and the white paper has taught me a lot (and probably will continue to do so for some time). There are people here who do listen, and who do want to learn. The people who don't, don't. It's OK. There doesn't have to be an "anyone" vs. "anyone."

thumbs up
shiftybits
GenusModu wrote:


Shiftybits,

This is not about EEs vs. non-EEs. It is about folks who try to absorb the information and educate themselves if need be, and those who don't. There have been EEs and non-EEs on both sides of this.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Fair enough. Perhaps I could have worded my thoughts better. I was giving an honest opinion of how the first 10 pages of this thread "felt" after reading them straight-through in one sitting. It may be worth absorbing that as well, since I may not be the only one who comes across this thread and leaves feeling that way. That's not an attempt to cast blame on anyone, simply an observation.

I appreciate the information you guys have created, and the new things I can learn from it. I don't see the need for an argument.

thumbs up
nimmen
I'm still waiting for stinker info and availability. As I've decided to go two cases "portable" and rest will be static case(s) with linear PSU. Will definitely try LIBB to hear the effect, as I'm generally a little bit dissapointed in eurorack sound quality and that could be ralated to noisy power(I'm one of those guys that can hear a difference between OFC and good quality silver cables) and I'm not using pure switching PSUs(so far use doepfer psu3). Funny thing that I will be putting biggest and cheapest modules to big static case with best PSU, but probably they should have biggest effect from it.
Blairio
paults wrote:


If you carefully look at my posts, where I do this as a 'last resort' , it's because the people I'm speaking to ARE NOT LISTENING. Or rather, they simply have some sort of cognitive dissonance going on.



Cognitive dissonance comes about when people can no longer align their thoughts, actions and beliefs. I may be going a bit off piste, but I struggle to see evidence of cognitive dissonance in this thread. There's plenty of other contention though, but not CD.
Blairio
nimmen wrote:
I'm still waiting for stinker info and availability. As I've decided to go two cases "portable" and rest will be static case(s) with linear PSU. Will definitely try LIBB to hear the effect, as I'm generally a little bit dissapointed in eurorack sound quality and that could be ralated to noisy power(I'm one of those guys that can hear a difference between OFC and good quality silver cables) and I'm not using pure switching PSUs(so far use doepfer psu3). Funny thing that I will be putting biggest and cheapest modules to big static case with best PSU, but probably they should have biggest effect from it.


I used to keep half an eye on the OFC vs regular copper debate (OFC has fewer crystals therefore fewer crystal boundaries to screw phase), then found a couple of papers that noted lowering the ambient temperature improves any interconnect performance. (That's why supercomputers have cryogenic levels of cooling). So perhaps turn your heating down, and don't waste money on OFC. Did Kraftwerk use OFC, or Can or Neu? Probably not.
paults
I should have the Lil' Stinker (+-1A max, but 800ma 'rated') test data in about 5 weeks. I've pushed it out a few weeks to get the #2 test boards built so I can troll Muff's....I mean.....so I can ship a few more E370s to the KickStarter backers.
Mungo
slow_riot wrote:
Paul I don't have the complete phase and impedance measurements of a bus bar system from supply to module including the interconnects, but no such measurement exists for the LIBB either, despite your insistence on this as the USP.
This is a very valid criticism especially when the plots of impedance provided are from simulation and not measured (they have the tools to do so). Reducing the impedance of the power source seen at the module can be one important thing (for some modules), but it is not completely correlated with immunity to crosstalk another important thing (for some modules) which can be improved with increased impedance seen at each module. These slights of hand are subtle and not just to be thrown down as proof or justification but reveal the complexity that cannot be summed up in the ridiculously framed answers provided so far. Its all so situation specific that there is no broad way to say any one solution is the best or lowest noise as so many things can appear as noise in an entire rack.
paults
I want someone to show, via simulation or measurement, what the impedance of a bussbar system is.

By someone that, .....I dunno.....[gestures wildly]....someone that knows the difference between impedance and resistance.
GenusModu
slow_riot wrote:
From the website: "LIBB brings modern engineering science to Eurorack power distribution, providing the quietest system you can possibly build and record. " There are plenty of other allusions to this claim too.

Noise and interference modalities can be incredibly complex in audio systems and claims like this muddy the water. Please do not take this as an affront to the engineering, as the format is desperate for innovation in power supply and distribution for those who cannot bear the cost/weight of a linear supply with bus bars, but there is simply no way for this claim to be supported.


You know, the second part of that quoted sentence is over the top. I have updated it to be more precise within the LIBB product space.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
slow_riot
Mungo wrote:
This is a very valid criticism especially when the plots of impedance provided are from simulation and not measured (they have the tools to do so). Reducing the impedance of the power source seen at the module can be one important thing (for some modules), but it is not completely correlated with immunity to crosstalk another important thing (for some modules) which can be improved with increased impedance seen at each module. These slights of hand are subtle and not just to be thrown down as proof or justification but reveal the complexity that cannot be summed up in the ridiculously framed answers provided so far. Its all so situation specific that there is no broad way to say any one solution is the best or lowest noise as so many things can appear as noise in an entire rack.


I didn't see the tables of z out versus frequency, my mistake. Not sure if they will show much if they are simulated as opposed to measured, the caps obscure some of the measurements too (think that was already covered?!).

I am glad someone else agrees that offering a solution as the best in all circumstances is a dangerous road to tread. I hope no-one regrets those words in the broader complexities of the evolving eurorack format.
GenusModu
paults wrote:
I want someone to show, via simulation or measurement, what the impedance of a bussbar system is.

By someone that, .....I dunno.....[gestures wildly]....someone that knows the difference between impedance and resistance.


I would like to see any measured data on bus bars. Coupled power bus noise tests, patching noise tests, comparisons to standard eurorack bus boards. The biggest missing part is _how_much_ an improvement is made compared to other solutions. I've never seen any published results of bus bar audio improvements.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Joe.
paults wrote:

Remember: the way science works is:

a) we publish finding


No mate, you've completely lost the plot. This isn't a scientific journal and the bullshit that was presented wouldn't be allowed in a scientific journal ("we tested stuff, we just cant tell you what we tested, lol")

We weren't presented with a scientific breakthrough, We were presented with a product. All the material that's been presented is an advertisement and that means we're protected by the consumer watchdogs in each of our countries.

The moment a LIBB is sold in Australia, with marketing spiel like 'the Best' or 'the Quietest', I'm going to lodge a complaint with the ACCC.

The dodgy salesmen of the Euro-PSU world wont have to worry about the fines (as they're not Australian companies), but distributors who end up out of pocket might think twice in the future about stocking products with false or misleading claims.
paults
Quote:
might think twice in the future about stocking products with false or misleading claims


The burden of that proof is not on us, BTW.

So far, not 1 person has refuted (look up what that word means in legal terms) our data.

In fact, the wording on the Genus website has been modified 3 times because PANTIES IN A WAD.

Good thing we are not talking about the best beer, or something.
paults
Quote:
with marketing spiel like 'the Best' or 'the Quietest', I'm going to lodge a complaint with the ACCC.


Better start with what is called 'legal precedent'



or maybe



OMG BEST AUSSIE OMG OMG

GenusModu
slow_riot wrote:
That's a little black and white John. You are implying that you have a product so revolutionary only you can understand it, when it really isn't the case. It's a promising solution but the claims in the marketing are as yet unproven and it's reasonable for them to be put under the spotlight given their boldness.

One weakness is that this distribution is not expandable like a bus bar, even with a star distribution the common impedance between multiple boards will be just as high as anything else currently available. This does not impact noise voltages appearing as a result of module power draw, but in an unbalanced system where return current when patching between modules flows through the OV it is another mechanism for crosstalk.


slowriot,

I have not said that only I can understand the product. For an engineering level understanding, any book written on Power Integrity in the last 10 years will help you out. These practices are common knowledge among power engineers, with tools specifically designed to apply the concepts. I am incredulous that there is any controversy about this.

For the patching noise issue, show how a difference of 5 or 10 milliohms in the ground bus distribution is going to improve or impact noise when each module has 10-20 milliohm series resistance in its own power connector to jack ground path. The theory is nice, but it has to take into account every part of the system, and then be followed up with measurements to show how much, or how little, an issue it is.

John
paults
What a good overview of power integrity, focusing on taking proper measurements, might look like



Joe.
paults wrote:
Quote:
with marketing spiel like 'the Best' or 'the Quietest', I'm going to lodge a complaint with the ACCC.


Better start with what is called 'legal precedent'


The ACCC allows puffery, advertisements consumers don't really believe. When you claim you have (secret) data that backs it up your no longer protected by that system.

The ACCC is going to ask you for the evidence you have, that you based your claim on (that means data collected from testing of all products, not mathematical models) and when you give them a weird analogy about cooking rice, they're going to stop your product from being advertised or sold in Australia.

You could have spent 1 minute reading the ACCC's website, but you choose to be armchair lawyer instead, and Google unrelated pictures.
squeedee
Just one more metaphor!

Medical research, for example, doesn't need to name the products compared either, it names the drugs, drug classes, or the modalities. It's perfectly legitimate to compare a drug to a modality as well, for example, NSAIDS are shown to be more effective than accupuncture in pain relief... No one gathered up every accupuncturist, just capable representatives.

The best current solution for chronic pancreatitis is going to kill someone soon, statistically, but it's still the best there is, and this assertion can be made even though it 1 will lead to suboptimal outcomes in some cases, 2 wasn't tested against every practitioner of the alternative procedures.

Pretty sure Paul had this the right way around, they do not need to retest well understood facts of EE, only find representative data.
paults
paults
Quote:
Pretty sure Paul had this the right way around, they do not need to retest well understood facts of EE, only find representative data.


Please stop making sense on a Muff thread. You're just going to confuse people.

Quote:
The ACCC is going to ask you for the evidence you have, that you based your claim on (that means data collected from testing of all products, not mathematical models) and when you give them a weird analogy about cooking rice, they're going to stop your product from being advertised or sold in Australia.


paults
Quote:
The ACCC is going to ask you for the evidence you have, that you based your claim on (that means data collected from testing of all products, not mathematical models) and when you give them a weird analogy about cooking rice, they're going to stop your product from being advertised or sold in Australia.


I wonder how many MSEEs with 30yrs of power and signal integrity are on the staff of the ACCC? I'll go with.....none.

I suppose they could hire an outside firm, probably at $300/hr, to review the LIBB claims and all our data. Maybe $10K cost? Again, I'll go with.....nope.

BTW: before you get all spun up [even more], go to the Genus website, hit CTRL-F and see how many hits you get for the word 'best'. I'll wait over here.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
I wonder how many MSEEs with 30yrs of power and signal integrity are on the staff of the ACCC? I'll go with.....none.


About as many as there are at Genus Modu:

GenusModu wrote:
paults wrote:
... John has worked over 30+ years at Qualcomm & Dell designing power systems for servers (besides designing keyboards at Kurzweil),...


I wouldn't call myself a power system designer. Rather I've picked up a smattering of skills in the power area while working on the total server designs, that could then be applied to modular synth power bus distribution.


You know you'd get a lot less backlash if you quit talking crap. You are cleverly manipulating the conversation and anyone with half a wit can see that. It isn't doing you any favours and if you continue you will eventually come unstuck. There are many qualified EE's here (several of which ARE power systems designers) biting their tongues because they don't want to get involved in this shit show. This thread could get a lot more interesting so you might like to tone down the rhetoric.
paults
Quote:
This thread could get a lot more interesting so you might like to tone down the rhetoric


Waiting to be refuted since page 1.

Still waiting.

Ask the other EEs about resistance versus impedance, and then ask them what the impedance over a 100Hz - 10MHz bandwidth would be of

a) solid copper bussbars
b) a 6-layer controlled impedance bussboard with both low ESR electrolytics and ceramic caps, distributed with 3 separate stitched ground planes

Ask them to read the PDF file. If they have specific questions, let us address them.

Ask them why you can't use regular oscilloscope probes to measure high dI/dt signals. Ask them about SMA connectors.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
Ask the other EEs about resistance versus impedance, and then ask them what the impedance over a 100Hz - 10MHz bandwidth would be of

a) solid copper bussbars
b) a 6-layer controlled impedance bussboard with both low ESR electrolytics and ceramic caps, distributed with 3 separate stitched ground planes


Like I've said (about as many times as you've asked) I already know the answer. Anyone that wasn't paying attention would think I'm asking you to prove it to ME (see: straw man). This is what I mean by clever manipulation. I am suggesting that you show the difference rather than repeating 'trust us we're EE's' ad nauseam. By using the LIBB PCB and connectors as control variables you could run a quick simulation and illustrate the difference with/without caps and it would be end of story. Take it or leave it, I don't care just stop straw manning. Every time you do, I'll correct you.

Also, interesting that in among all of this talk of 'proof is in the measurements' you've not mentioned the LIBB impedance plots are simulated (as mentioned by Mungo)... If that's the case why would you repeatedly ask for others to buy $30k of equipment and take the measurements themselves when they could just run a simulation? I just don't know why with what is evidently a great product and step forward in euro power distro you feel the need to exaggerate and inflate the truth. John has been up front and honest even if some of the LIBB marketing material might be seen as overzealous. You however are being disingenuous, hence the backlash.
paults
Quote:
Take it or leave it


OK, I'll leave it. I'll let you buy one, unless your buddy blocks it via the ACCC. Do before/after measurements with the caps, and report back.

Or, remove the caps, measure with cap meter. Use a good milliohm meter, measure the resistance. Go to www.tina.com and get the TINA SPICE simulator, and run the model.

Refute.

STILL WAITING.

Quote:
you feel the need to exaggerate and inflate the truth


Err....where? (suppose this will depend on what 'truth', and since you don't even HAVE a LIBB, what 'truth' do you refer to, exactly?)
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
Quote:
Take it or leave it


OK, I'll leave it. I'll let you buy one, unless your buddy blocks it via the ACCC. Do before/after measurements with the caps, and report back.

Refute.

STILL WAITING.


Again, I'm not refuting it. I see you have mastered the subtle art of making people think things without *technically* saying anything wrong. And, he's not my buddy. Are you suggesting some kind of collusion? Once again, nice try. Maybe it's not intentional and more a personality trait? I'll give you benefit of the doubt. wink
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
Quote:
you feel the need to exaggerate and inflate the truth


Err....where? (suppose this will depend on what 'truth', and since you don't even HAVE a LIBB, what 'truth' do you refer to, exactly?)


Umm, read the two sentences immediately before the one you quoted. And the post I made before that re: your exaggeration of John's qualifications as a power system designer. Please don't make me list every time you've exaggerated in this thread. It'd take hours and I have other commitments.
Joe.
meatbeatz wrote:
he's not my buddy. Are you suggesting some kind of collusion?


Can confirm meatbeatz is not my buddy, I don't like anyone from Melbourne (they steal Grandprixs, and their coffee's bullshit).

He has grown up in the same country though, protected by the same consumer laws. It's pretty unusual to see the type of hype in advertising that you tried to get away with in this thread, maybe that's what's upsetting him? It certainly upset me.

paults wrote:
the wording on the Genus website has been modified 3 times because PANTIES IN A WAD.


Why are you so against truth in advertising?
meatbeatz
LoFi Junglist wrote:
Can confirm meatbeatz is not my buddy, I don't like anyone from Melbourne (they steal Grandprixs, and their coffee's bullshit).

Dead Banana
LoFi Junglist wrote:
He has grown up in the same country though, protected by the same consumer laws. It's pretty unusual to see the type of hype in advertising that you tried to get away with in this thread, maybe that's what's upsetting him? It certainly upset me.

I'll admit this evangelistic approach to marketing does not rub well with me. My real problem though is having my comments misrepresented in order to make them (me) easier to attack so that one can be seen to be 'winning' and that this bullshit tactic in many cases actually works as if it weren't the oldest trick in the book.
neil.johnson
meatbeatz being likened to a strawman isn't too bad. At least you weren't called an incompetent engineer.

Funny... that $30k test equipment figure that's been bandied around is almost exactly how much the APx525 sitting on my desk cost.

Neil
slow_riot
GenusModu wrote:


For the patching noise issue, show how a difference of 5 or 10 milliohms in the ground bus distribution is going to improve or impact noise when each module has 10-20 milliohm series resistance in its own power connector to jack ground path. The theory is nice, but it has to take into account every part of the system, and then be followed up with measurements to show how much, or how little, an issue it is.

John


Several modular users had to tear apart and rebuild their whole professional studio setups because of common impedance in the signal return path. Some modules are available with balanced IO that is inherently resistant to this issue. Other power/distribution systems offer replacements to ribbons with lower impedance.
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:
I wonder how many MSEEs with 30yrs of power and signal integrity are on the staff of the ACCC? I'll go with.....none.


About as many as there are at Genus Modu:

GenusModu wrote:
paults wrote:
... John has worked over 30+ years at Qualcomm & Dell designing power systems for servers (besides designing keyboards at Kurzweil),...


I wouldn't call myself a power system designer. Rather I've picked up a smattering of skills in the power area while working on the total server designs, that could then be applied to modular synth power bus distribution.


You know you'd get a lot less backlash if you quit talking crap. You are cleverly manipulating the conversation and anyone with half a wit can see that. It isn't doing you any favours and if you continue you will eventually come unstuck. There are many qualified EE's here (several of which ARE power systems designers) biting their tongues because they don't want to get involved in this shit show. This thread could get a lot more interesting so you might like to tone down the rhetoric.


Ian,

I have worked with some of the top PMIC engineers in the server industry. I would not compare myself to them. Do not take that to mean I am unskilled in the areas of signal and power integrity. I work in those areas almost every day, but it is not my only area of expertise is what I was trying to clarify.

John Loffink
GenusModu
slow_riot wrote:
GenusModu wrote:


For the patching noise issue, show how a difference of 5 or 10 milliohms in the ground bus distribution is going to improve or impact noise when each module has 10-20 milliohm series resistance in its own power connector to jack ground path. The theory is nice, but it has to take into account every part of the system, and then be followed up with measurements to show how much, or how little, an issue it is.

John


Several modular users had to tear apart and rebuild their whole professional studio setups because of common impedance in the signal return path. Some modules are available with balanced IO that is inherently resistant to this issue. Other power/distribution systems offer replacements to ribbons with lower impedance.


Well sure, but those were forklift upgrades of systems with all sorts of improvements especially at the shared distribution level, not just the module power cables. You have to test and isolate the power cables to understand how much improvement can be gained just from them.

John
dubonaire
LoFi Junglist wrote:
The moment a LIBB is sold in Australia, with marketing spiel like 'the Best' or 'the Quietest', I'm going to lodge a complaint with the ACCC.


meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
I would not compare myself to them. Do not take that to mean I am unskilled in the areas of signal and power integrity.


I didn't mean to imply otherwise.. It reads as if you're a 30 year veteran power systems designer whereas the truth is more like you have 30 years experience in server design with skills in power design. Big difference.

There's at least some degree of subterfuge coming from Paul but he's practised enough to feign ignorance when called on it. He's good. Real good.

Next he'll be asking me to buy $30k of equipment to prove it.
paults
It's me with the MSEE and the +30yrs in power supply design. And the PE, and the patents and the +150 products designed.

And we worked on this board together.

And I think if you look on eBay, you can get the equipment a bit cheaper, but is it calibrated to ISO?

Any other objections?

Can you grow coffee in Melbourne? How can coffee be 'bad' just because it's in a different part of the country? THIS IS IMPORTANT.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
It's me with the MSEE and the +30yrs in power supply design. And the PE, and the patents and the +150 products designed.

And we worked on this board together.


Oh you were talking about yourself? Should've known. I've heard about the patents and 150+ products. Respect.

paults wrote:
Can you grow coffee in Melbourne? How can coffee be 'bad' just because it's in a different part of the country? THIS IS IMPORTANT.


Melbourne, Wellington and Seattle are the latte capitals of the world. Melbourne is not known for growing coffee but it is home of the Barista. It's also home of the Hipster, Portland running a close second. I am not proud of this (although they do make a good latte). LoFi Junglist's hometown of Adelaide is the capital of instant coffee, powdered milk and Milo. I'm guessing you're into black watery filter coffee which would explain your penchant for truck stop meals and waffles as they go well together.
paults
Not a daily coffee drinker (wife is), I'm more of a Godiva hot cocoa person (like milk/cheese/butter/etc lots of dairy).

I've only had a total of 16oz of coffee in my life (which was 50% milk), trying to stay awake in Japan when visiting Sharp (debugging a fax modem) and they had me in the 'visitor room' which was like an upscale middle-class living room. I was not allowed outside for 5 hours at a time and with the 12hr time difference, staying awake from 2-4PM was hard.

In the morning, they would wheel in a giant whiteboard with all the test results, on the left. I would write on the right half what they needed to do that day, and off they went. I then had to sit there (with my translator) until lunch, where there was 'the American Cafe' across the street.

Then, back to sitting until about 4:30PM, then they rolled the whiteboard back it to tell me what they measured.

This went on for 3 days, until they were convinced what I told them on Day 1 was correct (the telephone line coupling transformer sucked because they were trying to save 40 cents per fax machine. Which when building 750,000 is kinda a big deal but it has to also kinda WORK).

This was 1991 and hence no Internet or even smart phones so it was literally sitting there. At least the couch and chairs were reasonably comfy (sort of 'mid-Century modern')
Joe.
meatbeatz wrote:
Melbourne is not known for growing coffee but it is home of the Barista. It's also home of the Hipster, Portland running a close second.


I had to visit Melbourne once (to see a Synthi100) and while enjoying a Yiros i saw, no lie, a line of about 100 hipsters outside a Jeans store.

I stood outside the Yiros store in shock, as bouncers selectively let in a couple of people at a time across the road. A line of trendies, sipping $8 coffees, stood in the shitty Melbourne weather for custom skintight jeans to be made in front of them.

I'll never visit Melbourne again.
Blairio
I wonder what the best collective noun for a group of hipsters is... maybe a 'Hip' of Hipsters? or a 'wastrel' of Hipsters? Someone once suggested a 'Pretention' of hipsters, or a 'Fixie' of hipsters. etc etc etc.
MARK27
Years ago I remember reading that the collective noun for a group of hipsters is a "disaffection."
JohnLRice
Blairio wrote:
I wonder what the best collective noun for a group of hipsters is... maybe a 'Hip' of Hipsters? or a 'wastrel' of Hipsters? Someone once suggested a 'Pretention' of hipsters, or a 'Fixie' of hipsters. etc etc etc.
Maybe like lions, a "pride" of hipsters would be appropriate? ;-)
meatbeatz
See what I mean re: Paul's diversionary tactics?
He has us talking about hipsters without even so much as mentioning the word. I'm telling you, he's good. Real good. sad banana

(joking)
dubonaire
meatbeatz wrote:
Melbourne is not known for growing coffee but it is home of the Barista. It's also home of the Hipster, Portland running a close second. I am not proud of this (although they do make a good latte). LoFi Junglist's hometown of Adelaide is the capital of instant coffee, powdered milk and Milo. I'm guessing you're into black watery filter coffee which would explain your penchant for truck stop meals and waffles as they go well together.


Melbourne was once the home of the Barista but that home has arguably moved to Sydney now. Nonetheless I think Melbourne is one of the most civil and friendly cities in the world, despite its parochiality. thumbs up

Adelaide's not really a city at all.
Joe.
dubonaire wrote:
Adelaide's not really a city at all.


I don't want to sound like paults, but to be honest, I'd only consider your criticism if you were actually my peer. razz
listentoaheartbeat
meatbeatz wrote:
LoFi Junglist's hometown of Adelaide is the capital of instant coffee, powdered milk and Milo.


Interesting, he always struck me as a canned beer kind of person.
dubonaire
LoFi Junglist wrote:
dubonaire wrote:
Adelaide's not really a city at all.


I don't want to sound like paults, but to be honest, I'd only consider your criticism if you were actually my peer. razz


One day you might get there, constable Plod.
Joe.
listentoaheartbeat wrote:
Interesting, he always struck me as a canned beer kind of person.


Nah, I usually drink whatever's on tap. I know i'm out of touch with what the snazzy people are drinking these days.

I Was at a wedding last weekend, grabbed a bottle of beer from the catering tent, and it was 'Orange peel and Coriander flavour'.

WTF is that all about seriously, i just don't get it
mskala
LoFi Junglist wrote:
I Was at a wedding last weekend, grabbed a bottle of beer from the catering tent, and it was 'Orange peel and Coriander flavour'.

WTF is that all about :despair:


That's a Belgian wheat-beer thing. It can be quite nice in hot weather.
Artaos
paults wrote:

What you have to do instead is have a power distribution that is BOTH

a) low resistance
b) low impedance

Low resistance is to not INCREASE the overall noise due to the resistance of the interconnect. But low resistance does nothing for that switcher noise. NOTHING.

What you need is a AC path to ground. And not just SOME AC path, a precise, calculated, wide-band path to ground. This is mostly the design effort in the LIBB.


Thank you paults for your explanations, I'm learning a lot. I think I understand how a high resistance would increase the switcher noise and how a low resistance would not necessarily reduce it, because if the distribution has low resistance but still high impedance, the switcher noise would not be reduced, because the switcher noise is inherently high frequency AC. Is that right? I don't have a background in EE, could you explain in simple-ish terms why/how making something low resistance is different from making something low impedance like the LIBB? I'm just trying to grasp the high level concepts to make better informed purchase decisions (I'm very interested in the LIBB). Because before this thread I was under the impression that low resistance was enough of a goal, but that doesn't seem right to me anymore.
paults
At a simple level, think if the LIBB as a RC low-pass filter (series resistor with a cap to ground).

At DC, the cap is an open and all the current flows through the resistor.
If the signal was just AC (like audio), then based on the values of the R and the C, the AC amplitude starts getting less an less because that capacitor has an 'impedance', which is a resistance based on frequency (not 100% true but close enough). The impedance starts off 'high' and as the frequency INCREASES, approaches a dead short. Again not EXACTLY, the caps are not perfect and do strange things like ESR and SFR but we are just getting the basics down.

The output of any (switcher or linear) supply is a DC signal (like +12V), but added to that is called "ripple and noise". This is the result of how the DC was generated in the first place.

In a switcher, we use a high frequency (say 500KHz) PWM signal, and this creates high-frequency AC noise.

In a perfect, DC distribution system (like a car battery), it's OK to use just conductors (like woven copper braid or bussbars) because, in again a GENERAL WAY, there is no AC signal generated by the power supply. In a linear system, this noise/ripple is very small and <200Hz. It is easy to filter out.

But this is not true in a switcher, where not only is that AC signal 500KHz, it's got high CURRENT spikes as well (it is hard to think in terms of current and not voltage). And this is were low resistance helps, because the high current generates a 'IR' (current times resistance) additional voltage noise.

What the LIBB does is use capacitors, but in a very SPECIFIC way, to filter out the switching noise coming in AND ALSO filter out module-to-module noise, because some module ALONE will generate noise on the power rails.

There are other LIBB 'tricks' that come into play, but understanding how a capacitor is a DC open, but an AC variable resistor, is a good place to begin.
paults
Check out this video I did, and also Part 2 (off to the side will be the link).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTOHQ-qrMtU
Artaos
Very informative. Thank you! thumbs up
latigid on
I had a look at the paper, and although there's a section on filtering for SPSUs and a lot has been made of the benefits for such using the LiBB, on the page of recommended power supplies (http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html) all of the recommendations are for linear PSUs. One exception is the upcoming Big/Little Stinker "hybrid" by Synthtech.

Is there really nothing off-the-shelf that can be recommended to be used with the LiBB that isn't a linear supply?

Also, there's a Z/freq plot with/without caps at the bottom. Is that new news?[/url]
Leverkusen
latigid on wrote:
I had a look at the paper, and although there's a section on filtering for SPSUs and a lot has been made of the benefits for such using the LiBB, on the page of recommended power supplies (http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html) all of the recommendations are for linear PSUs. One exception is the upcoming Big/Little Stinker "hybrid" by Synthtech.

Is there really nothing off-the-shelf that can be recommended to be used with the LiBB that isn't a linear supply?

Also, there's a Z/freq plot with/without caps at the bottom. Is that new news?[/url]


Now I am getting confused. hmmm.....

What I understood from this thread, at least I thought so, was that the LIBB is a good solution, if not the best, for switching supplies while with linear supplies rack rails are a good solution and the LIBB would not add much in that case. But when I read this from the genus modu site I wonder If I still got it wrong?

Quote:
Recommended power supplies are listed below. For best results use linear or well designed hybrid models. Most linear designs and some hybrid power supplies will be suitable for use with LIBB. While LIBB can significantly reduce switching power supply noise, the end solution will still be noiser than an average linear power supply.


Wouldn't the common Doepfer style passive bus boards, if not power bars, be okay then with linear supplies when the LIBB is mainly designed to reduce the noise of common switching supplies?
Mungo
Leverkusen wrote:
latigid on wrote:
I had a look at the paper, and although there's a section on filtering for SPSUs and a lot has been made of the benefits for such using the LiBB, on the page of recommended power supplies (http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html) all of the recommendations are for linear PSUs. One exception is the upcoming Big/Little Stinker "hybrid" by Synthtech.

Is there really nothing off-the-shelf that can be recommended to be used with the LiBB that isn't a linear supply?

Also, there's a Z/freq plot with/without caps at the bottom. Is that new news?[/url]


Now I am getting confused. hmmm.....

What I understood from this thread, at least I thought so, was that the LIBB is a good solution, if not the best, for switching supplies while with linear supplies rack rails are a good solution and the LIBB would not add much in that case. But when I read this from the genus modu site I wonder If I still got it wrong?
The lower impedance at high frequencies on the LIBB bus board could improve a system with a linear power supply, if the major problems were high frequency noise (from crosstalk by one module feeding back into the power rail). But this is usually only a problem with poorly designed modules, so you could possibly fix it easier/cheaper by replacing the problem module.

Heavy rails/bars are usually targeting lowest impedance at very low frequencies, for instance in the 0V connection from unbalanced loads. That won't appear as noise so much, and would be more noticeable as changes to pitch when connecting unrelated patch points.

Leverkusen wrote:
Quote:
Recommended power supplies are listed below. For best results use linear or well designed hybrid models. Most linear designs and some hybrid power supplies will be suitable for use with LIBB. While LIBB can significantly reduce switching power supply noise, the end solution will still be noiser than an average linear power supply.


Wouldn't the common Doepfer style passive bus boards, if not power bars, be okay then with linear supplies when the LIBB is mainly designed to reduce the noise of common switching supplies?
As above they might be entirely adequate but it depends on the specific modules used.

latigid on wrote:
Is there really nothing off-the-shelf that can be recommended to be used with the LiBB that isn't a linear supply?
At this point its looking like a marketing campaign for Synth Tech and their upcoming power supplies, by not mentioning all the other good solutions already available. You could expand an active bus board such as:
https://malekkoheavyindustry.com/product/malekko-power/
or
http://mungo.com.au/euroPower.html
GenusModu
Leverkusen wrote:


Now I am getting confused. hmmm.....

What I understood from this thread, at least I thought so, was that the LIBB is a good solution, if not the best, for switching supplies while with linear supplies rack rails are a good solution and the LIBB would not add much in that case. But when I read this from the genus modu site I wonder If I still got it wrong?

Wouldn't the common Doepfer style passive bus boards, if not power bars, be okay then with linear supplies when the LIBB is mainly designed to reduce the noise of common switching supplies?


There are two main sources of power coupled noise: the power supply and the modules.

LIBB effectively filters high frequency switching noise from switching power supplies. That does not mean it is exclusively good for switching power supply filtering. LIBB is designed to reduce all power coupled noise, not just switching noise. LIBB uses the ultra low impedance path to the capacitors to do filtering that other boards cannot accomplish.

LIBB also has a low resistance path between modules and the power supply source, reducing common impedance coupling across the modules, working across most of the audio range. The high frequency filtering is also effective here for modules with switching regulators on them, which feed noise back through the ground and power rails.

A Doepfer bus board appears to be a single sided design, so you can project that it's noise will be worse than the 1 ounce dual sided board that was used in the white paper tests.

All of the tests in the first section of the white paper use a linear power supply, so clearly the weight of copper alone does make a difference as seen in the waveforms and spectrums.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#results-intro

It is not as simple as replacing a few modules in a system. If you eliminate all modules with switchers, LEDs, OTAs, transistor VCAs or saturation and so forth you will have a very small system.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
paults
Quote:
Heavy rails/bars are usually targeting lowest impedance at very low frequencies


Just stop already. If you honestly don't know the difference between resistance and impedance, please JUST STOP ALREADY.
Mungo
paults wrote:
Quote:
Heavy rails/bars are usually targeting lowest impedance at very low frequencies


Just stop already. If you honestly don't know the difference between resistance and impedance, please JUST STOP ALREADY.
Shouting about other people using the term correctly while you are the one who has been disingenuously twisting it for your own purposes is a bit rich. We can take any series of references to the term impedance and they describe it as the effective resistance at a given frequency |Z|, that could be expressed as a complex impedance breaking the amplitude and phase separately or we could stick with the |Z| used in the LIBB white paper which is being discussed here. The fun thing about |Z| is that its units are ohms! An equivalent/effective resistance, but at a given frequency.

Resistance is the special case of impedance at DC, but as some acute people will point out DC is an infinitely low frequency such that it lasts forever, in the practical world with a multimeter we make measurements of resistance over fractions of a second so we're only measuring the impedance at 10Hz or 1Hz. Using more sophisticated equipment I've measured impedances of various power supplies from 20MHz down to 0.001Hz and there can be differences below 1Hz which are important in a synthesizer case.

Bus bars don't have capacitors distributed along them (usually), but they could. What bus bars do have is extremely large cross sections of material which give them lower impedance at very low frequencies. Resistance is commonly used for the extreme case of DC but bus bars have lower impedance up into LFO frequencies when compared to wires of the same length. If a case as heavily unbalanced current draw between the power rails there can be significant currents flowing in the 0V connections, and all of a sudden low impedance at low frequencies becomes important. I have measured small two row cases where plugging in a patch cable between the two rows causes a 1mV shift in the 0V reference, plug in a couple and all of a sudden there is an audible shift in pitch. This gets much worse with larger cases and why having a low impedance at lower frequencies can be important, bus bars are a practical way to do this. For a large case bus bars connecting LIBB's together could be an excellent solution.

So far you've jumped around the important point that impedance (or resistance) is measured between two given points, for discussion of power quality its being measured at the "output" of the bus board between the power rail and 0V (ground/GND depending on who's terminology you prefer). Thats a very good way to assess and compare different solutions, but:
paults wrote:
But a bigger question remains: why can't the LIBB actually BE the best? Is that not allowed somehow? I mean, it's 100% MEASUREMENTS.

paults wrote:
Because we are ONLY talking MEASUREMENTS. Not OPINIONS here. MEASUREMENTS.

Immediately you've failed on your own criteria as you're relying on theoretical simulation and not the measurements you demand anyone else produce to even discuss this. I've made those measurements, yet you still come in and try and claim no-one else could possibly have input on this.

So lets return to this:
paults wrote:
What you have to do instead is have a power distribution that is BOTH

a) low resistance
b) low impedance

Low resistance is to not INCREASE the overall noise due to the resistance of the interconnect. But low resistance does nothing for that switcher noise. NOTHING.
We would like a low impedance supply with low impedance across a broad range of frequencies, from very low frequencies (effectively DC) up to some high frequency where it no longer matters. We'll disagree on where that point is but you've not provided more than your own theories on that so far. So low impedance across broad frequencies at the output power connection for the module.

but...

If the power supply has a lot of noise coming out of it, we might want to intentionally introduce higher impedances in the connection between the power supply and bus board at some frequencies. As you suggested the power system is one large distributed filter and if the power supply is noisy that noise (at a particular frequency) can be attenuated by the ratio of the distribution impedance from the supply to the bus board, and the impedance of the bus board (as a simple model). Sometimes we do want higher impedances in the system to isolate noise and prevent it spreading around the system.

This extends further into the module where it has its own power distribution and filtering.

It all gets very complicated quickly, reducing the impedance of the power supply to 0v/ground/GND at common points such as bus boards is a noble goal and will improve power quality at the frequencies it targets. These are different frequencies to those that bus bars target. Use them together and you can control power supply and distribution noise over a wider range of frequencies, its a win win. But blindly applying either "solution" to a problem they don't address is of no use.

You like to point out specific failings about other solutions but refuse to acknowledge any truth when people point out shortcomings in yours, instead going back to your constrained examples that don't address the concerns raised. Or just saying the others don't know what they're talking about.

But I'm sure you'll have another one line quip about how everyone else is wrong.
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
It is not as simple as replacing a few modules in a system. If you eliminate all modules with switchers, LEDs, OTAs, transistor VCAs or saturation and so forth you will have a very small system.
That is an over simplification. Having those components does not immediately make a module a "problem" producing or accepting power supply noise excessively. Any of those parts could be included in a way which recognizes their problems and designs the module so that it wont either influence other modules on the same supply or be affected strongly by a noisy power supply. Many module designers are making sigificant efforts to reduce the noise their modules produce and ensure their modules are sufficiently filtered from noise coming from the power connection.

You yourself? provided this in the white paper:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
The number one variable for controlling noise is the output module in your audio signal path. It has the greatest impact on the noise level.
and also noted the same broad statement again:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
While one may be able to weed out or control the use of ultra high noise modules such as the attenuverter example, it is unreasonable to eliminate every OTA or transistor based VCA and VCF design in your system. Those modules are too numerous, and too interesting in many cases, to eliminate from any respectable Eurorack system.
Not every single module including those parts/designs has a poor power supply rejection, you will be able to find a range of sensitives to power supply noise. The example of an excellent module you provide in MI Veils has intentionally added impedance in the power supply rails (filtering components) to improve its rejection of power supply noise. In the larger sense you can consider the 2164 VCA they used to be a modern and higher performance OTA, still producing a current output (not a voltage as a typical opamp does) and varying the bias current in a differential pair to control gain. The Veils is an example of a well designed OTA module, there will no doubt be others and it would be possible to find good and bad examples of VCF modules or modules with lots of blinking LEDs.

There is no one solution, a combination of better power and better modules will produce the best possible result but most users have been satisfied with the performance of systems assembled with a variety of modules on a variety of power supplies. You can always set some lofty goal of performance which can only be achieved with the best of everything, but you need to define that goal and not just insist that users would need to get rid of all their modules if they want a usable system. 80-100dB SNR is sufficient for most users and is readily achievable by eliminating just the worst offenders producing and/or accepting noise, or by improving the power supply. Either could be the best option for a particular user.
paults
a) we measured the result, which is what people care about. The reduction in switcher noise versus the other solutions. No, we didn't rent a $35K vector impedance meter and have the Smith charts. Because average user. I know you hate hearing this, but again: we don't HAVE to because the SPICE model follows the RESULTS.

b) I want YOU to rent the vector impedance analyzer and show every one the phase shift of a non-capacitance bussbar system. Because if there is no phase shift, by definition, there is no "Impedance", is there. I want you to explain the phase shift mechanisms (C and L) are for a hunk of copper.

c) the "impedance" doesn't matter unless it IS relative to ground. Having a 'series' impedance is fine, like a ferrite bead but that only works against the associated input impedance with respect to that bead, which means hopefully, wait for it, .....a nearly cap to , ummm......ground. A series impedance in fact does nothing by itself, it's just like a DC series resistance which, is BAD.

A single 0.1uf cap to ground in series with a 120ohm ferrite bead has better noise rejection than a copper bussbar the size of a 2x4.
Mungo
paults wrote:
a) we measured the result, which is what people care about. The reduction in switcher noise versus the other solutions. No, we didn't rent a $35K vector impedance meter and have the Smith charts. Because average user. I know you hate hearing this, but again: we don't HAVE to because the SPICE model follows the RESULTS.
The equipment you have is sufficient for measuring the impedance as the scope has a function generator and 2 channels, if you built a low noise differential amplifier that could measure down below milliohms easily. As is it should be able to measure the 10's and 100's of milliohms you're talking about. You are the one who insisted on measurement when you haven't done it yourself, I don't really mind as long as its clear what you have is simulation. And could be compared to a simulation or theoretical characteristics of bus bars.

paults wrote:
b) I want YOU to rent the vector impedance analyzer and show every one the phase shift of a non-capacitance bussbar system. Because if there is no phase shift, by definition, there is no "Impedance", is there. I want you to explain the phase shift mechanisms (C and L) are for a hunk of copper.
Measure anything you like, but the comparison here is |Z| at the power header when connected to a high performance linear supply (or theoretical approximation there of), thats whats presented for the LIBB.

paults wrote:
c) the "impedance" doesn't matter unless it IS relative to ground. Having a 'series' impedance is fine, like a ferrite bead but that only works against the associated input impedance with respect to that bead, which means hopefully, wait for it, .....a nearly cap to , ummm......ground. A series impedance in fact does nothing by itself, it's just like a DC series resistance which, is BAD.
You're not expanding on, refuting, or discussing anything I wrote. For all your boasting about everyone using impedance and resistance wrongly, you're only adding confusion to this.

paults wrote:
A single 0.1uf cap to ground in series with a 120ohm ferrite bead has better noise rejection than a copper bussbar the size of a 2x4
That depends what impedance the bus bar is connected to and how long it is... and the particular capacitor... and the bead... you can make silly arguments all day long but they're not illustrative or helping anyone. That example could have great noise filtering performance at 1MHz 10MHz or 100MHz, but worse performance than a bus bar at 1kHz as the bead has a higher impedance at low frequencies than a bus bar.

One of those frequency ranges is audible and one isn't.

Its really simple, with the reference of 0.1 ohms impedance as the target:
Bus bar without capacitors is poor at controlling high frequency impedance, say 10kHz and up (less than 1uH inductance from simulations).
Low impedance bus board with capacitors is poor at controlling low frequency impedance, 5kHz and below (from the LIBB simulation data)

But its not a one VS the other argument, you can use both and get the benefits across the frequency range.
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
It is not as simple as replacing a few modules in a system. If you eliminate all modules with switchers, LEDs, OTAs, transistor VCAs or saturation and so forth you will have a very small system.
That is an over simplification. Having those components does not immediately make a module a "problem" producing or accepting power supply noise excessively. Any of those parts could be included in a way which recognizes their problems and designs the module so that it wont either influence other modules on the same supply or be affected strongly by a noisy power supply. Many module designers are making sigificant efforts to reduce the noise their modules produce and ensure their modules are sufficiently filtered from noise coming from the power connection.

You yourself? provided this in the white paper:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
The number one variable for controlling noise is the output module in your audio signal path. It has the greatest impact on the noise level.
and also noted the same broad statement again:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
While one may be able to weed out or control the use of ultra high noise modules such as the attenuverter example, it is unreasonable to eliminate every OTA or transistor based VCA and VCF design in your system. Those modules are too numerous, and too interesting in many cases, to eliminate from any respectable Eurorack system.
Not every single module including those parts/designs has a poor power supply rejection, you will be able to find a range of sensitives to power supply noise. The example of an excellent module you provide in MI Veils has intentionally added impedance in the power supply rails (filtering components) to improve its rejection of power supply noise. In the larger sense you can consider the 2164 VCA they used to be a modern and higher performance OTA, still producing a current output (not a voltage as a typical opamp does) and varying the bias current in a differential pair to control gain. The Veils is an example of a well designed OTA module, there will no doubt be others and it would be possible to find good and bad examples of VCF modules or modules with lots of blinking LEDs.

There is no one solution, a combination of better power and better modules will produce the best possible result but most users have been satisfied with the performance of systems assembled with a variety of modules on a variety of power supplies. You can always set some lofty goal of performance which can only be achieved with the best of everything, but you need to define that goal and not just insist that users would need to get rid of all their modules if they want a usable system. 80-100dB SNR is sufficient for most users and is readily achievable by eliminating just the worst offenders producing and/or accepting noise, or by improving the power supply. Either could be the best option for a particular user.


John/Mungo,

***breathe*** Take some long deep breaths…

I am not telling users what goal to set for their system signal to noise ratio. That is for the users to decide. Many users have decided they want the extra noise margin they get from a system built around LIBB. Many others will decide they don’t need it and I am fine with that.

The white paper shows how much improvement might be obtained from moving from flying bus cables to 1 ounce copper bus boards, from 1 ounce copper bus boards to 4 ounce copper bus boards, or from any of the previous solutions to LIBB. So if someone wants to ignore the LIBB parts and just look at the other results then it can also help them quantify _how_much_ their results can change with a different bus solution. That data has never been presented before to my knowledge.

I am not telling users to get rid of all their modules, I was responding to your assertion that
Mungo wrote:
…crosstalk by one module feeding back into the power rail… is usually only a problem with poorly designed modules, so you could possibly fix it easier/cheaper by replacing the problem module.

I have characterized noise for dozens of the most popular Eurorack modules. Most of them generate some measurable noise into the power rail. Does that mean they are all poorly designed and need to be replaced? No - I am arguing against that. Does it mean I am against design of quieter modules? No – I am all for it, but it does not reflect the majority of Eurorack modules and systems that are already out there.

As you point out in the quotes from my white paper, some selected “victim” modules have much higher levels of noise, usually by direct coupling of power rails into the signal flow. Those can be identified fairly easily in a system, but the follow on task of replacement is not as easy. Let’s say you have a noisy attenuverter/DC offset module and want to replace it. Go to ModularGrid, call up the top attenuverter/DC offset modules, and tell us which ones are noisy and which ones are quiet. Without schematics and board layouts that cannot be done, and to be really specific on noise levels you need to buy the module and measure it in a controlled environment. The typical user has to randomly sample modules until they find one that works – not easy IMO.

Now imagine going to the next level in noise reduction, after you’ve eliminated the most extreme victim modules, which we can argue is doable if not quite as easy as described. At this point I recommend improving the power bus solution rather than throwing out all traditional OTA and transistor based designs, because that is hundreds of Eurorack module designs we are now talking about, including most “vintage” styled modules. Trying to find a modern lower noise equivalent is going to be a futile effort in many cases, but I suppose we can chalk that up to a difference in opinion. It is not a realistic option for most users to eliminate so many modules IMHO.

FWIW, the Veils filtering on the power inputs does nothing in the audio range, as is the case with most module power inputs. The filtering helps with higher frequencies (50 KHz and above) where PSRR starts becoming less effective. For devices to get Veils level performance they need to use similar active devices with good Power Supply Rejection Ratios.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
It is not as simple as replacing a few modules in a system. If you eliminate all modules with switchers, LEDs, OTAs, transistor VCAs or saturation and so forth you will have a very small system.
That is an over simplification. Having those components does not immediately make a module a "problem" producing or accepting power supply noise excessively. Any of those parts could be included in a way which recognizes their problems and designs the module so that it wont either influence other modules on the same supply or be affected strongly by a noisy power supply. Many module designers are making sigificant efforts to reduce the noise their modules produce and ensure their modules are sufficiently filtered from noise coming from the power connection.
I am not telling users to get rid of all their modules, I was responding to your assertion that
Mungo wrote:
…crosstalk by one module feeding back into the power rail… is usually only a problem with poorly designed modules, so you could possibly fix it easier/cheaper by replacing the problem module.
Well thats sure what the response you gave looks like, it can be as simple as replacing one (or a few) modules in a system if the user can identify a particularly bad source of noise:
unplugging modules one at a time to see if any are introducing most of the noise
or identify that a particular module is accepting noise significant more than others:
listening to the outputs of each different module when unpatched to see if one in particular has more noise coming from it

These are the foundations that users can be doing themselves, to learn about their system and what is appropriate for it. It may well reveal that their favourite module is causing more noise in the power than they are happy with and the best solution would be a better power system, equally it could reveal that a single cheap utility mixer is the sole cause of all their problems and could be replaced.

In the past people have found that rearranging their power connections to keep the sensitive modules and noise creating modules on separate bus boards/supplies/sections was sufficient, those techniques are still valid even when using improved bus boards or distribution.

GenusModu wrote:
Let’s say you have a noisy attenuverter/DC offset module and want to replace it. Go to ModularGrid, call up the top attenuverter/DC offset modules, and tell us which ones are noisy and which ones are quiet. Without schematics and board layouts that cannot be done, and to be really specific on noise levels you need to buy the module and measure it in a controlled environment. The typical user has to randomly sample modules until they find one that works – not easy IMO.
This is a problem, but as users are educated to the importance of this they will seek out the information. There is still a lack of comparable specifications for customers to use when buying parts of their system, most power supplies don't even mention their noise performance. As people realise what the problem modules are they will begin asking whats better, and between the manufacturers being asked for data on this and from the other users experiences on here that information will come about.

GenusModu wrote:
FWIW, the Veils filtering on the power inputs does nothing in the audio range, as is the case with most module power inputs. The filtering helps with higher frequencies (50 KHz and above) where PSRR starts becoming less effective.
I've been very careful and checked all my data before making any comments, the Veils module has filtering effective from around 4kHz upward. Below this is where your impedance plots suggest the LIBB also stops being effective and relies on the low resistance connection to the power supply, again techniques which can be applied to many power systems by adding heavier cables or bus bars.

You've put out a great product that is a substantial improvement over the majority of other choices in many ways, particularly the reduced power noise above 10kHz. The data you provided backs this up and alone makes a great contribution.

But when you and paults oversell it we'll jump in and ask some critical questions, or provide some counter points.
Pelsea
Wow, I hadn’t realized that modular synthesis had entered the land of the tweak audiophiles! I don’t mean that in the disparaging sense of hundred dollar patchcords, but we are talking about effects in the sub -100dbu area. I have no doubt the product behaves as described in the white paper (and if you think that one is tough to follow, I can point you to some papers in CMJ or JAES that make it read like “Cat in the Hat”). Whether I will want one for my yet to be delivered system, I don’t know. My expectations are based on equipment a bit older than many of the members here. I do agree that the final module is critical to noise of a patch, so I will be looking into Veils.

BTW My experiences with antique beasts has shown me the value of buss bars— the extra low resistance may seem negligible but it does improve the performance of the module’s old school on board PS filtering.
paults
Quote:
BTW My experiences with antique beasts has shown me the value of buss bars


Did these beasts:

a) have 400MHz dual core-DSPs running in modules?
b) use a switch-mode power supply?

I'll guess no, and no.

Apples, meet oranges.
dubonaire
Pelsea wrote:
I don’t mean that in the disparaging sense of hundred dollar patchcords, but we are talking about effects in the sub -100dbu area.


If you take some time to read the numerous threads by people who have significant noise issues, especially with switching power supplies, you will see many people experience noise problems much louder than -100dBu.
neil.johnson
paults wrote:
It's not 'snake oil', come on Neil you're better than this (unless you have a horse in this race).


TL;DR

Whatevs...
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
It is not as simple as replacing a few modules in a system. If you eliminate all modules with switchers, LEDs, OTAs, transistor VCAs or saturation and so forth you will have a very small system.
That is an over simplification. Having those components does not immediately make a module a "problem" producing or accepting power supply noise excessively. Any of those parts could be included in a way which recognizes their problems and designs the module so that it wont either influence other modules on the same supply or be affected strongly by a noisy power supply. Many module designers are making sigificant efforts to reduce the noise their modules produce and ensure their modules are sufficiently filtered from noise coming from the power connection.
I am not telling users to get rid of all their modules, I was responding to your assertion that
Mungo wrote:
…crosstalk by one module feeding back into the power rail… is usually only a problem with poorly designed modules, so you could possibly fix it easier/cheaper by replacing the problem module.


Well thats sure what the response you gave looks like, it can be as simple as replacing one (or a few) modules in a system if the user can identify a particularly bad source of noise:
unplugging modules one at a time to see if any are introducing most of the noise
or identify that a particular module is accepting noise significant more than others:
listening to the outputs of each different module when unpatched to see if one in particular has more noise coming from it

These are the foundations that users can be doing themselves, to learn about their system and what is appropriate for it. It may well reveal that their favourite module is causing more noise in the power than they are happy with and the best solution would be a better power system, equally it could reveal that a single cheap utility mixer is the sole cause of all their problems and could be replaced.

In the past people have found that rearranging their power connections to keep the sensitive modules and noise creating modules on separate bus boards/supplies/sections was sufficient, those techniques are still valid even when using improved bus boards or distribution.

GenusModu wrote:
Let’s say you have a noisy attenuverter/DC offset module and want to replace it. Go to ModularGrid, call up the top attenuverter/DC offset modules, and tell us which ones are noisy and which ones are quiet. Without schematics and board layouts that cannot be done, and to be really specific on noise levels you need to buy the module and measure it in a controlled environment. The typical user has to randomly sample modules until they find one that works – not easy IMO.


This is a problem, but as users are educated to the importance of this they will seek out the information. There is still a lack of comparable specifications for customers to use when buying parts of their system, most power supplies don't even mention their noise performance. As people realise what the problem modules are they will begin asking whats better, and between the manufacturers being asked for data on this and from the other users experiences on here that information will come about.

GenusModu wrote:
FWIW, the Veils filtering on the power inputs does nothing in the audio range, as is the case with most module power inputs. The filtering helps with higher frequencies (50 KHz and above) where PSRR starts becoming less effective.


I've been very careful and checked all my data before making any comments, the Veils module has filtering effective from around 4kHz upward. Below this is where your impedance plots suggest the LIBB also stops being effective and relies on the low resistance connection to the power supply, again techniques which can be applied to many power systems by adding heavier cables or bus bars.

You've put out a great product that is a substantial improvement over the majority of other choices in many ways, particularly the reduced power noise above 10kHz. The data you provided backs this up and alone makes a great contribution.

But when you and paults oversell it we'll jump in and ask some critical questions, or provide some counter points.


John/Mungo,

I would not say that tracking down and fixing noise in Eurorack is easy. Once you get to OTA/Transistor class devices there will be many other modules in the system generating detectable noise. For the white paper charts the noise spectrum has contributions from 11 different modules. Replacing or moving a few modules will not make much difference.

The problem with moving modules in a high resistance distribution system is everything wants to be at the slot nearest the power supply, to minimize common impedance coupling. If the cable to the power supply is high resistance, which is usually the case, then even the first slot is noisier than the lower resistance system.

Users should not have to mess around with debugging their system noise issues, or build their configuration around mix and match of noise aggressors and victims. It should just work.

The statement about the community identifying problem modules, manufacturers giving data and designing quieter modules is an optimistic viewpoint of some future nirvana that likely never occurs. Even if it did, users want to fix their noise problems today, not speculate on how good it might be in the future.

You are correct on Veils, I neglected the ferrite bead DCR of 600 milliohm which moves the -3dB point to 5 KHz by my calculations. But it is a very muted slope due to the high ESR of 850 milliohm for the 22 uF capacitors. Reduction at 20 KHz is only -7dB. While that is better than nothing, the point I was trying to make was the 2164 VCA PSRR is achieving much more reduction than any LC or RC filter on the module. With a similar power filter on an OTA module the noise will not change much, in fact the OTA VCA I tested had 47 uF caps at the power inlet. So we are agreeing on the point that the lower resistance for ground and power distribution makes the greatest difference in low-mid audio frequency noise.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
FWIW, the Veils filtering on the power inputs does nothing in the audio range, as is the case with most module power inputs. The filtering helps with higher frequencies (50 KHz and above) where PSRR starts becoming less effective.
I've been very careful and checked all my data before making any comments, the Veils module has filtering effective from around 4kHz upward. Below this is where your impedance plots suggest the LIBB also stops being effective and relies on the low resistance connection to the power supply, again techniques which can be applied to many power systems by adding heavier cables or bus bars.
You are correct on Veils, I neglected the ferrite bead DCR of 600 milliohm which moves the -3dB point to 5 KHz by my calculations. But it is a very muted slope due to the high ESR of 850 milliohm for the 22 uF capacitors. Reduction at 20 KHz is only -7dB. While that is better than nothing, the point I was trying to make was the 2164 VCA PSRR is achieving much more reduction than any LC or RC filter on the module. With a similar power filter on an OTA module the noise will not change much, in fact the OTA VCA I tested had 47 uF caps at the power inlet. So we are agreeing on the point that the lower resistance for ground and power distribution makes the greatest difference in low-mid audio frequency noise.
You've again jumped to your conclusions based on incorrect assumptions, the Veils module has additional series impedance from the diode and PTC/fuse inline with the power rails further increasing the effectiveness of filtering the supply. There are two 22uF capacitors in parallel as bulk and then distributed 100nF caps which would show much lower impedance than the 850mOhm (value for single part only) you suggest. And it would be just as effective in dB reduction applied to other circuits.

You've added these sorts of biases people have discussed already into your simulated results. When you have a result in mind its all too easy to miss details and end up with what you expected, and the same applies to testing and measuring results. But thats ok as long as the method is clear and people can consider it in context. From your well presented data in the white paper we can make lots of inference and understand why you arrived at the results you did, I see a different reason for much of the results than you do.
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
You've put out a great product that is a substantial improvement over the majority of other choices in many ways, particularly the reduced power noise above 10kHz. The data you provided backs this up and alone makes a great contribution.

But when you and paults oversell it we'll jump in and ask some critical questions, or provide some counter points.
....So we are agreeing on the point that the lower resistance for ground and power distribution makes the greatest difference in low-mid audio frequency noise.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Its taken a lot of people trying to discuss this here to get to that point. You compared (and simulated) power distribution in combination with bus boards, and showed improvements when using your bus board and improved distribution together. For all the loudly proclaiming low impedance is the key, the majority of the improvements have been made with low resistance distribution. Your new bus board makes it easier to connect low resistance distribution cabling, and has a very low resistance its self as do many other bus boards you didn't compare to. You even sell a convenient low impedance distribution cable as a solution to make it easier for customers.

But bundling it all up and advertising it as the LIBB is the fix for noise leakage/coupling is hiding the majority of audible contributions are from the supply and distribution.
paults
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Leverkusen
Hm, I am about to built a new rack and just in case I go for LIBB'ys I wonder if the positive effect would be still there when I get two of them and reuse two of the Doepfer boards I have now in my case. All four would then run from 2 linear PSU's (well, one from one and three from the other).

While it's good that the hot mockery here is over I still find it hard to make out if these boards are worth the investment. As someone who understands resistance and capacity but not impedance I have to trust the makers which again is affected by how they are dealing with being questioned. Taking the marketing speech and the colored waveforms away a lot of the information on the website sounds reasonable to me but some of the points made here do also. seriously, i just don't get it

It would be great if someone with more understanding could sum up what this is all about and point me to some of those mysterious other boards that might be as good as the LIBB. Also it's a matter of availability of course.
paults
Quote:
It would be great if someone with more understanding could sum up what this is all about


I tried, maybe over 30 different posts?

Maybe ignore the posts from people with competing products? Maybe they should have their own threads? Ones that we wouldn't troll all the time? That would be AWESOME!

Short answer: there is NOTHING BETTER than LIBB out there today.

And it's not because we said so. It's because no one has SHOWN otherwise.
Zymos
I hope these devices are waterproof, because otherwise they might be damaged in the pissing contest.
paults
They are waterproof, as they are washed with de-ionized water in the assembly process
bobbcorr
paults wrote:
They are waterproof, as they are washed with de-ionized water in the assembly process


This is the good news I was waiting for.

w00t
gonkulator
Zymos wrote:
I hope these devices are waterproof, because otherwise they might be damaged in the pissing contest.


applause lolspew
Mungo
Leverkusen wrote:
It would be great if someone with more understanding could sum up what this is all about and point me to some of those mysterious other boards that might be as good as the LIBB.
Some of the other bus boards might be better than the LIBB at some things, and others also claim to be the best without any clarification:
https://www.errorinstruments.com/a-50500937/error-modular/power-strip- pro-bus-board/
There are others with lots of information and low DC resistance:
https://www.midi-hardware.com/index.php?section=prod_info&product=POWD IS
Or specific filtering:
https://reverb.com/item/11566521-konstant-lab-filtered-bus-board-for-e urorack-power-distribution
The LIBB includes good parts of those in a single product, its also on the market and available. Its a good product with many good features and a great choice for a passive bus board.

If you can go through all the information provided, much of the improvement in a power system (such as the tests with the LIBB) comes from a lower impedance power supply and distribution cabling or bus bars, including details such as how you connect the bus boards to the power supply. Again GenusModu is providing a solution there to make it easier:
http://www.genusmodu.com/products/eha.html
However the marketing may not be acknowledging those that came before them with even more extreme lower resistance:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=124246
or including tests to demonstrate the effectiveness of low resistance:
https://rabidelephant.com/pages/low-loss-distribution-board-noise-test s
But they're not exactly on the market and being advertised for sale, so its a bit of a grey area.

If you already have a good power supply with plenty of capacity then it makes sense to expand it with appropriate bus boards. But to get even more noise isolation than a passive board could offer you can get power supplies with multiple isolated sections:
http://www.elby-designs.com/webtek/power/busboards/ed111-active-busboa rd/ed111-guide.pdf
or
https://malekkoheavyindustry.com/product/malekko-power/
Along with extensive noise isolation they also place the power supply right on the bus board and solve much of the challenge of power distribution, then its down to controlling the 0V noise/error across the case.

This sort of claim is the problem:
paults wrote:
Short answer: there is NOTHING BETTER than LIBB out there today.

And it's not because we said so. It's because no one has SHOWN otherwise
This really needs some clarification of the claims, as whats been shown is that the LIBB board is more effective in filtering high frequency noise above 10kHz than possibly any other passive bus board. There are examples of other bus boards (or bus bars) which would have lower impedance at audio frequencies using the same test methods but you wave your hands and won't even discuss it.

paults wrote:
Quote:
It would be great if someone with more understanding could sum up what this is all about


I tried, maybe over 30 different posts?

Maybe ignore the posts from people with competing products? Maybe they should have their own threads? Ones that we wouldn't troll all the time? That would be AWESOME!
Trolling you own thread (creating the drama rather than trying to discuss it or be polite) as you've done to competitors and then claiming you're the victim is truly entertaining.
Zymos
Certified Golden Shower Resistant - it's the new UL.
paults
Quote:
There are examples of other bus boards (or bus bars) which would have lower impedance at audio frequencies


I claim there are not.

So, this is how it works: you then set up the equipment, then YOU run the tests to prove ME wrong.

Because if you think a 0.0001ohm solid silver bussbar even HAS an impedance < 100Mhz, I just .......sigh........

See, in the world [gestures about wildly], if I claim my Ferrari get better gas mileage than your Prius, then you don't spend 100 posts attacking the Ferrari.

You get a Prius, run the test and...see how this all works?
attacca
paults wrote:
it's the OTHER people's job to refute our "claims" if they think we are wrong or misrepresented.

paults wrote:
Short answer: there is NOTHING BETTER than LIBB out there today.

And it's not because we said so. It's because no one has SHOWN otherwise

paults wrote:
See, in the world [gestures about wildly], if I claim my Ferrari get better gas mileage than your Prius, then you don't spend 100 posts attacking the Ferrari.

You get a Prius, run the test and...see how this all works?

I should know better than to get into this mess...
paults if YOU make a claim the Burden of Proof is on YOU.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" -Carl Sagan
Crisco_Thunder
In the real world the EPA sends auto manufacturers very detailed testing procedures for determining fuel efficiency. Manufacturers test their own vehicles and the EPA audits 10-20% of the results with their own testing to keep everybody honest. Some are selected randomly and some are selected because they are a Ferrari claiming to be more fuel efficient than a Prius.
paults
Quote:
paults if YOU make a claim the Burden of Proof is on YOU.


I made the claim, the proof was published.

This is how it works.

If you disagree with the findings, publish a COUNTER paper.

Is this so hard to understand? Am I the only one here that graduated with a science degree? BTW: I was in honors Chemistry before EE.

If everyone is so CONVINCED I AM WRONG, then PLEASE PROVE IT.

You can't "argue": I THINK you are wrong. [bussbars]
You can't "argue": what you say sure SOUNDS wrong ["snake oil"]
You can't argue: You didn't test everything when we tested many [mungo]
You can't argue. What you do, is you provide a COUNTER proof, measured.

This is how it works. You can 'find fault' until the cows come home. But unless SOMEONE runs the same identical tests, and we said EXACTLY how and with the exact equipment, what is the point again?

Are we still back to 'best' again? REALLY?
MarcelP
paults wrote:


This is how it works.

If you disagree with the findings, publish a COUNTER paper.



It could work like this:

I buy your product, it works to my satisfaction, all good.

I buy your product, it doesn’t work to my satisfaction, I return your product (within x days), you refund me 100% of the purchase price.

If your product is the best and you are happy trusting the honesty of your consumers (in the same way you expect them to trust you) there is no risk to you and your product will fly off the shelves never to return.
Mungo
paults wrote:
Quote:
paults if YOU make a claim the Burden of Proof is on YOU.

You can't argue: You didn't test everything when we tested many [mungo]
Thats exactly what I've avoided saying. The blind comparisons to other products is a great way to present the data. But if you want to dismiss the performance comparison to bus bars or improved distribution, then you'll need to have something to support that other than just telling us we don't know what we're talking about. So far you've stepped out and repeated one small nugget of truth:
paults wrote:
bussbars do NOTHING for reducing switcher noise
This is entirely correct and without question. But then you've tired to dismiss any benefits they do have for reducing crosstalk in the audio frequency range, and how the choice of power supply has a significant impact on this too. The impedance of bus bars is known to be trivially small at audio frequencies, a simple model of a 1 meter long bus bar is of the order under 1mOhm and a few hundred nanoHenries. Despite being happy enough to settle with simulated values for the connecting wires in the impedance plots shown in the LIBB white paper why not consider similarly arrived at figures for bus bars? I do and have no doubt about their performance at audio frequencies, and thats backed up with actual measurements which you don't have to offer.
blitit
Eurorack power supplies are a mess without standards. Im glad someone is making something about it AND make it the right way (with proof).

Scientific method in eurorack!? Has any other manufacturer dedicated so much time and effort in one of his products? I dont think so.

Quote:
It could work like this:

I buy your product, it works to my satisfaction, all good.

I buy your product, it doesn’t work to my satisfaction, I return your product (within x days), you refund me 100% of the purchase price.

If your product is the best and you are happy trusting the honesty of your consumers (in the same way you expect them to trust you) there is no risk to you and your product will fly off the shelves never to return.


Thats a different level, thats a consumer level. Here they are talking about research/design/manufacturing. At that level you work with scientific method
paults
As an aside, here is the current list, that I am aware of (please correct me if wrong), of current Euro manufacturers that offer an unlimited, lifetime warranty:

a) Synthesis Technology
paults
I guess mungo is a competitor threadjacking another manufacturer's thread (can you even imagine if I went on say, an Erica tread about their Graphic VCO and started yelling about E352s??!?)

At any rate:

a) if you have a linear supply, and your Euro modules have NO digital modules, then yes, a bussbar system is the best possible system ASSUMING no victim modules. It's still possible for your analog LFO to power-supply bleed into your analog VCO.

And this was possible say 3-4 years ago, about the time the Hinton system announced.

However, with todays LFOs and now EGs using MCUs, it's going to be harder and harder.

Also: linear supplies offered for sale in cases (ie not a DIY job) require UL/CE testing and certification and again, correct me if I'm wrong, no such cases currently exist and by default the only that did (and does no longer I think) is LEGALLY considered a fire and safety hazard. And I own 3 of them.

b) if you use a "brick" switcher AND/OR you have digital modules AND/OR you have victim modules (ones sensitive to noise on the rails) then currently, right now, the LIBB is the best solution.

This is where 14 pages has gotten us to. Sure, I use 'best' here, but not to annoy the sensitive, this word has been taken off the LIBB pages.

I suppose you can choose to "believe" me or not [shrug]. I suppose you can look at the data and think it's come as a tin-foil hat Monster cable/$3000 USB cable/$4000 HDMI cable snake oil [shrug]. You can summarize all 14 pages as "The LIBB seems to be a great product but I REALLY don't like your marketing choice of words" also [shrug].

Or, you can just buy one and try it out?
Joe.
paults wrote:
I guess mungo is a competitor threadjacking another manufacturer's thread


You make a fuss about people not having the technical knowledge to question your assertions, and also dismiss the only people that would have that knowledge from participating in your threads.

So glad I've finally got the last of your modules out of my system.
TemplarK
paults wrote:
As an aside, here is the current list, that I am aware of (please correct me if wrong), of current Euro manufacturers that offer an unlimited, lifetime warranty:

a) Synthesis Technology


b) Cwejman
MarcelP
blitit wrote:

Quote:
It could work like this:

I buy your product, it works to my satisfaction, all good.

I buy your product, it doesn’t work to my satisfaction, I return your product (within x days), you refund me 100% of the purchase price.

If your product is the best and you are happy trusting the honesty of your consumers (in the same way you expect them to trust you) there is no risk to you and your product will fly off the shelves never to return.


Thats a different level, thats a consumer level. Here they are talking about research/design/manufacturing. At that level you work with scientific method


Yeah - I took my cue from the thread title "New product announcement..." (rather than "New engineering technique..." or "Applied science takes a new turn...") which kind of implies it is about informing and wooing prospective customers. hmmm.....
Zymos
TemplarK wrote:
paults wrote:
As an aside, here is the current list, that I am aware of (please correct me if wrong), of current Euro manufacturers that offer an unlimited, lifetime warranty:

a) Synthesis Technology


b) Cwejman


C) Audio Damage (though I guess it's debatable if they should be considered "current")
paults
Not current, questionable support
paults
Quote:
So glad I've finally got the last of your modules out of my system.


Good for you! So this means you cannot EVER comment on any of my posts ever again. right?
paults
Quote:
which kind of implies it is about informing and wooing prospective customers.


We did, until 3 of our competitors jumped in.

Now, ask yourself this: ever seen this sort of thing happen to MakeNoise? Mutable? Where competitors go into their OP and question their "stuff"?

Or just me?

a) we announced
b) people screamed BEST BEST BEST SNAKE OIL BEST UNFAIR SLAGGING
c) so we gave 30+ pages of test results
d) trolling ensues, again by the competition
e) so, we say "OK, we'll take the BEST out of all the website". And we did.
f) then comes people, without EE degrees, making EE arguments
g) I explain the difference between resistance and impedance, and then impedance path to ground
h) I ask 11 times for MEASURED DATA and so far get NONE. And the reason is: trolling?

And after all this, I'm somehow "the bad guy"? REALLY?
paults
Here is the docs for my MOTM-490 Moog ladder VCF. There is a "top view" of how impedance 'works', and how capacitors 'filter'.

Click the DOCS box, and download the PDF.

MOTM-490 doc

Here is a tutorial of me showing my SPICE SW (TINA) and I also use a simple RC lowpass (where the cap is the IMPEDANCE to GROUND). Which visually shows how this 'filters signals'

TINA RC filter tutorial

Can we FINALLY get out of the 6th grade lunchroom banter? I sure would!
MARK27
At the risk of getting hit by shrapnel, I would just like to say that, as an absolute layman in this field, I have actually gotten some good information as a result of all this arguing. I even made some purchases as a result of what I have learned!

As far as the spectators are concerned, this hasn't all been pointless. A little repetitive occasionally, but not pointless!

Guinness ftw! Fencing Enjoy the show!
noisewreck
All I am gonna say that this thread the clusterfuck that it is has made me want to buy the LIBB.
paults
TemplarK
paults wrote:

Dude hahahahahaha your killing me now
grep
For better or worse, the product will speak for itself.
Mungo
paults wrote:
a) if you have a linear supply, and your Euro modules have NO digital modules, then yes, a bussbar system is the best possible system ASSUMING no victim modules. It's still possible for your analog LFO to power-supply bleed into your analog VCO.
You still try and simplify this with huge generalisations. Linear or switching (or more commonly now hybrid) power supplies can all achieve low output impedance, very few specify this but some do and you can always measure it if you are really interested. But beside that you keep jumping with your reasoning:

Yes, if a module is creating noise and another module is creating noise you could reduce that with filtering in the power distribution. Or other methods.
Yes, the LIBB is far more effective at reducing noise above 10kHz than bus bars, or a bus board with poorly chosen filtering, or no filtering.

but thats only above 10kHz when comparing to bus bars, and you've not provided any justification as to why the noise up there is so important to the end result in the audio range. Again simplifying to any digital modules will make a bus bar the less desirable option assumes that a) they're not adding noise in the audio range (they do), and b) the extra noise in the inaudible high frequency ranges is more of a problem. So far that has not been established.

paults wrote:
Also: linear supplies offered for sale in cases (ie not a DIY job) require UL/CE testing and certification and again, correct me if I'm wrong, no such cases currently exist and by default the only that did (and does no longer I think) is LEGALLY considered a fire and safety hazard. And I own 3 of them.
We've heard numerous people on both sides of the linear/switching "debate" try and claim product standards, regulations, laws, etc make the other choice impossible to use. Reality is they are treated very similarly. You could make the same wild statement without restricting it to linear power supplies and it would be equally true.

Linear/switching/hybrid supplies can be designed to have indistinguishable output characteristics, any of those categories could have exceptionally low output impedance across the audio range with the connections and distributed capacitance of the distribution system limiting the performance above the audio range. The LIBB addresses that, but you distract from what it does here instead of helping people understand it.

paults wrote:
b) if you use a "brick" switcher AND/OR you have digital modules AND/OR you have victim modules (ones sensitive to noise on the rails) then currently, right now, the LIBB is the best solution.
You would have to replace all those AND/OR statements with just AND to make that closer to true, and for a specific combination of modules there might be better solutions. For a simple example of why your statement is so wrong with a noisy power system and no "victim" modules that are overly sensitive to noise there wouldn't be a problem, adding a LIBB probably wouldn't make things worse but it wouldn't make the result better. And as above trying to draw a division between switching and linear supplies for their output characteristics is pointless as you can find examples of either that have high or low output impedance, and the distribution contributes more to the power system as you look at higher and higher frequencies. Equally there are linear supplies which have more noise than quiet switching supplies, so you can't sit on such simplistic categorisations.

paults wrote:
h) I ask 11 times for MEASURED DATA and so far get NONE.
If you want measured data, here is some overlaid on top of the simulated results presented for the LIBB and chosen comparisons:

Measured using the same methodologies used in the white paper and on those plots, connected to a real linear power supply. I could have connected it to a much higher performance power supply (which uses a hybrid approach) and obtained better results, but this is whats achievable with reasonably priced linear supplies and off the shelf bus bars from electrical suppliers. Equally that could have been connected to a switching supply and achieved the same result as I've measured the output impedance of many power supplies and could select an excellent example of a switching supply, agreed many would be worse than typical linear supplies but a power system is complex and needs many well selected parts to build it up.

As I keep saying, I'm not slagging off or saying the LIBB is a bad product, in fact I'm going out of the way to highlight its good points and well balanced design that addresses many of the things a bus board should be doing. It does them all very well, unlike others which will only do one thing better its a well designed product and all the people involved should be rightly proud of it.

But you're making wild claims that don't hold up to examination, and when people try and discuss it you just shut it down with tangents and excuses. If you want to make big claims you need more than just your engineering hunches, simulations can be a good basis but when you're the one lacking in measurements insisting that other people back up their assessments with measurements is a bit over the top. I don't need to resort to name calling, here are the measurements for everyone to consider.
Mungo
LoFi Junglist wrote:
paults wrote:
I guess mungo is a competitor threadjacking another manufacturer's thread

You make a fuss about people not having the technical knowledge to question your assertions, and also dismiss the only people that would have that knowledge from participating in your threads.
Noting that for all the claims I'm a competitor, I don't sell passive bus boards and don't see any need to even enter the market for them as the LIBB is such an excellent option I'll happily recommend it and suggest people buy it if they want a passive bus board to expand a power system.
paults
Quote:
LIBB is such an excellent option I'll happily recommend it and suggest people buy it if they want a passive bus board to expand a power system.


paults
Mungo, thaks for the nice graph. The switching frequency of most power bricks are in the 250KHz to 1MHz range (also the range on on-board switchers, like on the E352).

The cyan curve for LIBB shows the excellent (is that an OK word?) low impedance in this band. Assuming the Y Axis is in dB, then if at 1MHz (the upper range of switcher noise) and use LIBB as the 'reference', then:

- bussbars have ~1700 times more impedance
- flying buss cables and the 2 typical bussboards have ~8000 times more

The LIBB uses several techniques to achieve this (not that 'rocket science', really):

a) capacitor selection based on ESR, SFR and interconnect resistance
b) 6 layers of 1oz copper
c) placing the power inputs in the center as opposed to one outside edge
d) "stitching" of the internal copper layers with 100s of vias, evenly distributed over the board.
Sleipnir
I bought one.
I want to see if it can help this (the 1/vo output of a FH1 on a system with a new linear power supply).
If it helps, replacing all 15 of my "other brand" boards.

The settings:
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:
If you want measured data, here is some overlaid on top of the simulated results presented for the LIBB and chosen comparisons:

Measured using the same methodologies used in the white paper and on those plots, connected to a real linear power supply. I could have connected it to a much higher performance power supply (which uses a hybrid approach) and obtained better results, but this is whats achievable with reasonably priced linear supplies and off the shelf bus bars from electrical suppliers. Equally that could have been connected to a switching supply and achieved the same result as I've measured the output impedance of many power supplies and could select an excellent example of a switching supply, agreed many would be worse than typical linear supplies but a power system is complex and needs many well selected parts to build it up.

As I keep saying, I'm not slagging off or saying the LIBB is a bad product, in fact I'm going out of the way to highlight its good points and well balanced design that addresses many of the things a bus board should be doing. It does them all very well, unlike others which will only do one thing better its a well designed product and all the people involved should be rightly proud of it.


John/Mungo,

Thanks for the measured bus bar impedance data. More data is always good. Do you mind mentioning the wire gauge and length used for the connections? That resistance tends to be the major contributor to common impedance coupling in a bus bar system.

I do hope to eventually get to some impedance measurements of the various systems.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
Sleipnir wrote:
I bought one.
I want to see if it can help this (the 1/vo output of a FH1 on a system with a new linear power supply).
If it helps, replacing all 15 of my "other brand" boards.


Sleipnir,

I am always happy to help pre- or post-sales on identifying system noise and whether LIBB or EHA might help or not. It's best to contact me directly through email for those cases.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
paults wrote:
Mungo, thaks for the nice graph. The switching frequency of most power bricks are in the 250KHz to 1MHz range (also the range on on-board switchers, like on the E352).

The cyan curve for LIBB shows the excellent (is that an OK word?) low impedance in this band. Assuming the Y Axis is in dB, then if at 1MHz (the upper range of switcher noise) and use LIBB as the 'reference', then:

- bussbars have ~1700 times more impedance
- flying buss cables and the 2 typical bussboards have ~8000 times more

The LIBB uses several techniques to achieve this (not that 'rocket science', really):

a) capacitor selection based on ESR, SFR and interconnect resistance
b) 6 layers of 1oz copper
c) placing the power inputs in the center as opposed to one outside edge
d) "stitching" of the internal copper layers with 100s of vias, evenly distributed over the board.


Correction for b) LIBB is 6 layers of 2 oz copper.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
neil.johnson
paults wrote:
Also: linear supplies offered for sale in cases (ie not a DIY job) require UL/CE testing and certification and again, correct me if I'm wrong, no such cases currently exist and by default the only that did (and does no longer I think) is LEGALLY considered a fire and safety hazard. And I own 3 of them.

Interesting. Does that apply to any commercially-offered case including custom cases made by a cabinet maker, or just those in volume production?

Thanks
Neil
Mungo
paults wrote:
Mungo, thaks for the nice graph. The switching frequency of most power bricks are in the 250KHz to 1MHz range (also the range on on-board switchers, like on the E352).

The cyan curve for LIBB shows the excellent (is that an OK word?) low impedance in this band. Assuming the Y Axis is in dB, then if at 1MHz (the upper range of switcher noise) and use LIBB as the 'reference', then:

- bussbars have ~1700 times more impedance
- flying buss cables and the 2 typical bussboards have ~8000 times more
But we have no link between the noise at 1MHz and the final audible result. There have been suggestions of possible minor interference and you're welcome to present examples of how that affects the end result. But clinging to some tiny area where you can shout about big numbers when they have little to no importance is just continuing to derail the thread.

Oh and as noted, those bus bars had no capacitors on them. If someone feels high frequency damping of the power system is important they could add them and end up comparable to the LIBB. The data was presented as you were stubbornly refusing to concede that bus bars systems could possibly have lower impedance even in the audio range.

GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
Measured using the same methodologies used in the white paper and on those plots, connected to a real linear power supply. I could have connected it to a much higher performance power supply (which uses a hybrid approach) and obtained better results, but this is whats achievable with reasonably priced linear supplies and off the shelf bus bars from electrical suppliers. Equally that could have been connected to a switching supply and achieved the same result as I've measured the output impedance of many power supplies and could select an excellent example of a switching supply, agreed many would be worse than typical linear supplies but a power system is complex and needs many well selected parts to build it up.

As I keep saying, I'm not slagging off or saying the LIBB is a bad product, in fact I'm going out of the way to highlight its good points and well balanced design that addresses many of the things a bus board should be doing. It does them all very well, unlike others which will only do one thing better its a well designed product and all the people involved should be rightly proud of it.


John/Mungo,

Thanks for the measured bus bar impedance data. More data is always good. Do you mind mentioning the wire gauge and length used for the connections? That resistance tends to the major contributor to common impedance coupling in a bus bar system.

I do hope to eventually get to some impedance measurements of the various systems.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
The major contributor to that impedance plot is the power supply its self, moving up from 12mm bus bars to 20mm or 25mm or 40mm would make little difference to the result. The next level of improvement would be to add some capacitance along the bus bars, be that distributed with laminated bars, or with bolt on capacitors, or a combination of the two. Using the same techniques as you have in the LIBB, but I'm unsure of the benefit users would see from going to such lengths.
paults
Quote:
Does that apply to any commercially-offered case including custom cases made by a cabinet maker, or just those in volume production?


If it is delivered to a North American address, then it needs UL. If it is shipped to a country in the EU, it needs CE.

doesn't matter if the production is 1 or 100,000
paults
Quote:
The data was presented as you were stubbornly refusing to concede that bus bars systems could possibly have lower impedance even in the audio range.


What "impedance" to ground can a bussbar possibly have?

If this was a model, please show the SPICE netlist or schematic.

I was unaware solid copper has a reactive component.
Joe.
paults wrote:
I was unaware solid copper has a reactive component.


This is bait.
Mungo
LoFi Junglist wrote:
paults wrote:
I was unaware solid copper has a reactive component.


This is bait.
Or possibly an admission that Paul doesn't actually know whats going on here. Simulations of power systems can use 3D layouts of the parts/boards/wires/etc to create much more complicated models than something which would be simulated with a SPICE schematic. This incorporates the materials and dimensions of the design and produces very detailed simulations that can match very closely with real measurements without having to build all the possible ideas. This is for example where the optimal position of a capacitor to be located on a PCB can be determined. Its used routinely in large companies to optimise their products and readily produces reliable results for systems including PCBs or bus bars.

For all the announcements of:
Genus Mode | Low Impedance Bus Board wrote:
LIBB brings modern engineering science to Eurorack power distribution
I had assumed they were using these contemporary tools to design and then verify through simulation of the impedance.

Rather than simulating the entire system in 3D as finely segmented pieces you can get coarser and coarser until its larger electrical models of the wire and the PCB as single elements with no spatial information. There are well known approximation models for PCB planes and bus bars which have been tested against real examples, but they can over simplify things such as assuming the power enters at one end of the plane and exits at the other. A simpler model like that is still very useful for designing with but it will likely be further from the real result which is why measuring the final result in the real world is important.

Whatever level of detail was employed in the simulations and modelling, they can be equally applied to wires, PCBs, or solid bus bars which is the sticking point here with Paul.
Mungo
LoFi Junglist wrote:
paults wrote:
I was unaware solid copper has a reactive component.


This is bait.
PS..
Just to be a little silly, its not just electronics but people have impedances too!
Its an abstract quantity as a function of frequency that is used to model how things will interact with electricity.

An infinitely small piece of copper would have infinitely small resistance/reactance/impedance/inductance/capacitance/whatever word Paul wants to say we haven't used yet, but a real world object will have non zero impedances.
paults
I fully understand models/SPICE/Maxwell equations/Faraday's/etc.

I just want to know, at say 5KHz, what the reactive component of a 20cm copper bussbar is, say 8x8mm?

Because I don't think there is one.

Again: you graph shows a bussbar with a VARYING AC impedance. Simply describe what you did (with screenshots) to get that curve. I'm NOT baiting, I'm not trolling.

I want to see how you think a bar of copper, without caps, has any sort of reactive component at 1-20KHz.

In order to HAVE an AC impedance, by definition, there has to be a capacitance, an inductance, or both. So, it's a simple question.

What you are saying is if I have a signal generator, and a scope, say 20cm apart, and I connect the 2 together with these bussbars, and I sweep the function generator in the audio range, there is a varying amplitude & phase seen by the scope.

Wow, my scope probes with 26ga wire must be awful, then? Hmmm...they claim to be flat to 450MHz +-0.15ddB
paults
Quote:
This is bait.


What's your degree in again?
Mungo
paults wrote:
Again: you graph show a bussbar with a VARYING AC impedance. Simply describe what you did (with screenshots) to get that curve. I'm NOT baiting, I'm not trolling.

I want to see how you think a bar of copper, without caps, has any sort of reactive component at 1-20KHz.
Its presented exactly the same way as the results for the LIBB, the impedance between two points in the distribution system when the other end is connected to a power supply. For the data I plotted alongside the graph in the LIBB white paper, it was not simulated but measured as you insisted on.

To simulate the same thing I can pull up a model of the inductance and resistance of bus bars (or ask the manufacturer for this data) and add that to the known output impedance of a power supply. But as I keep saying, the power supply was the limiting factor in that setup, the bus bars had little effect on the distribution impedance measured.

From what I can see of the simulation data presented for the LIBB it has taken models of the resistance and inductance of wires connected from a perfect/ideal power supply, and then added some sort of extra details for the PCB and capacitors. To what level of granularity I'm unsure. But none of those details are public so I can't use the exact same approach unless you tell us what was done.

If you are incapable of choosing an appropriate model of bus bars with similar detail and complexity to compare against the LIBB simulations then you're the one with the failings. I jumped right past any possible question of what model to use and how to apply it and shared real world measured results. Yet still you want everyone else to place some new and specific information right at your feet but won't bring anything yourself.

paults wrote:
I fully understand models/SPICE/Maxwell equations/Faraday's/etc.
If you're so comfortable with them you'll have no problem with your next question

paults wrote:
I just want to know, at say 5KHz, what the reactive component of a 20cm copper bussbar is, say 8x8mm?
I don't really care, if you want that information you can get it yourself. Or derive it from Maxwells equations which you say you fully understand. Or take an existing model and use it. Or get the physical object and measure it.

paults wrote:
Because I don't think there is one.
You might be in for a surprise if you measure it then.
attacca
I like turtles.
Joe.
paults wrote:
Quote:
This is bait.


What's your degree in again?


Applied linguistics (focused on sociolinguistics). My trade cert is as an Electronic Technician.

This makes me qualified to a) understand what the (parasitic) impedance of an object is, and b) identify bait in a social media post.

A Busboard/busbar is part of a network btw. Ask one of your technicians what that means.
paults
So, if you made such a measurement, which shows reactance, I would like to see a photo or at least a drawing /block diagram of the setup.

Because if you are saying the setup is:

signal generator over 14ga wires to the bussboard over some distance (d1)
bussbars alone (no capacitors) of some length (d2)
A Euro power ribbon to the scope probe (ribbon is length d3)

The only reactive thing (thing with impedance of IMPORTANCE....sigh....) is the ribbon cable. Which I doubt has more than a 0.05dB change in the audio band, and in a former life I was sending 14MHz square waves over 8 feet of ribbon cable no problems.
neil.johnson
paults wrote:
Quote:
Does that apply to any commercially-offered case including custom cases made by a cabinet maker, or just those in volume production?


If it is delivered to a North American address, then it needs UL. If it is shipped to a country in the EU, it needs CE.

doesn't matter if the production is 1 or 100,000

Ok, thanks. So I guess any USA case maker who builds a custom 1-off case and install Genus Modu Low Impedance Bus Boards and selected linear power supplies at customer request will need to get it tested and certified/marked by UL before they can ship to their customer?

By "need", do you mean that having the UL mark is a legal requirement for a commercial entity (company) to sell the case?

Neil
paults
Think of UL like a patent.

- I can build something that violates a patent and sell it
- the patent holder ELECTS to sue me or not
- if I DO get sued, the patent holder can ask for triple-damages as the violation is "willful" in legal terms

So, UL is sorta like that except (speaking strictly USA now)

- each state/county/city can determine if it is unlawful to SELL a non-UL listed "appliance" (what everything plugged into the wall is called)
- if someone is "harmed" by a non-UL listed appliance (shock, or fire), the federal court can sue, you will be forced out of business and your credit ruined forever. Trust me, the LAST THING you want is a UL lawsuit. I've watched them (from the sidelines) and not pretty. UL can post armed US Marshalls at your place of business (like your garage) and forbid people entering for 90 days. UL has more authority in the US than your local police force.

I never tell people to "wire up" their own supplies to AC unless you know EXACTLY what you are doing, and NEVER say you should offer them for sale. The risk is too high.

When I did the MOTM linear supplies, the UL hassle was a nightmare and I've never done that since.
paults
Quote:
will need to get it tested and certified/marked by UL before they can ship


Now, it's been at least 15 years since I've checked, but it USED to cost about $5600 and take 9 months for the testing/certification procedure.

And, if you want to build more than 1, then you are subject to random UL inspections (by MSEEs, usually) on site, and you CANNOT REFUSE the inspection, and they will sit there for 3 hours giving you hell.

Typical UL inspection: can you please show me all proof that this heat-shrink is UL approved, VW-1 flame rated? Also, will need to see all your POs for their purchase for the last 18 months, and then please let me inspect the physical heat-shrink for proper markings.

At least my last inspector was nice enough (and cute, sorry but she was).

UL is no picnic.
neil.johnson
paults wrote:
I never tell people to "wire up" their own supplies to AC unless you know EXACTLY what you are doing, and NEVER say you should offer them for sale. The risk is too high.

Wow, yes, you don't want those guys turning up. So how does that square with http://www.genusmodu.com/partners.html
Quote:
Cases and Cabinets

Erik Needham Woodworks - Milling their own boards in house from rough lumber and using time proven woodworking techniques, Erik Needham Woodworks build cabinets where every grain of wood is embellished into the finished product. EN Woodworks will install Genus Modu Low Impedance Bus Boards and selected linear power supplies at customer request.

Eurorack Modular Cases (EMC) - These sleek handcrafted designs are made in the USA. 2Egress Sound & Design applies years of studio furniture craftsmanship to the eurorack format, installing at request the Genus Modu Low Impedance Bus Board and high quality linear power supplies

Do you know if each case is certified by UL? Or are they working on the hope that nothing will go wrong and UL will never take an interest?

Neil
Mungo
paults wrote:
So, if you made such a measurement, which shows reactance, I would like to see a photo or at least a drawing /block diagram of the setup.

Because if you are saying the setup is:

signal generator over 14ga wires to the bussboard over some distance (d1)
bussbars alone (no capacitors) of some length (d2)
A Euro power ribbon to the scope probe (ribbon is length d3)
I didn't say that was what I did and you're once again derailing on a tangent to fill up the thread with more nonsense. I was quite succinct in what I measured, as was the detail in the LIBB white paper:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
chart of Zout (Impedance) vs. Frequency shows a 12 Volt rail
I don't question that and point out that nowhere does it mention explicitly that the simulation was from the 12V rail to ground/0V/gnd. When some small detail was unclear I instead politely asked John of Genus Modu a few questions in private to clarify what was being presented, rather than making a show of it in public. He was always happy to answer fully and honestly and never made any excuses or distractions as you keep doing. I was able to closely reproduce the impedance plots in the LIBB white paper with relatively simple models which fit with what was described so I'm confident they're realistic representations and close enough to reality to not need measurements for all of them.

Those impedances were simulated between a power rail and ground/0V/gnd out on the power distribution network when connected to model of a power supply. I repeated that in my measurement except with a real power supply and real bars of copper. It wouldn't have made a substantial difference if the bars were made of copper, silver, brass, plated copper, gold, or even aluminium as both groups discuss:
LIBB White Paper wrote:
The lower frequency roll off is from the power supply source impedance and regulator loop response combined with the cable and bus board resistance.
Which is exactly what I saw in my measurements and have repeated:
mungo wrote:
The major contributor to that impedance plot is the power supply its self
With low resistance bus bars up into the audio frequencies the power supply is the majority of the contribution to the impedance, we could break that down into a more detailed model/discussion/thoery as John of Genus Modu has done, or just let it sit as the measured result. If you can't believe that the geometry and materials of bus bars could produce such a result you really need to go back and create some models or measure it yourself.

paults wrote:
The only reactive thing (thing with impedance of IMPORTANCE....sigh....) is the ribbon cable. Which I doubt has more than a 0.05dB change in the audio band, and in a former life I was sending 14MHz square waves over 8 feet of ribbon cable no problems.
Does the LIBB simulation data include the ribbon cable?

I made a comparable measurement of a real power system connecting bus bars to a power supply, and measured the impedance of the power rail to ground/0V/gnd on the power distribution. Which I was told by John of Genus Modu is whats in the graphs presented in the white paper. Except instead of simulation I used a single port analyser (assembled from other bits of test equipment that you could do too) which had been calibrated with the short-open-load technique.

How much involvement did you actually have in designing this product? You seem to be ignorant to the actual details of what is presented.
paults
Quote:
Do you know if each case is certified by UL? Or are they working on the hope that nothing will go wrong and UL will never take an interest?


This is between them and UL. I'm just saying what my UL experience was.
dave999z
paults wrote:
if someone is "harmed" by a non-UL listed appliance (shock, or fire), the federal court can sue


Federal courts do not sue people. People, organizations, and governments sue each other in federal court.
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:

paults wrote:
The only reactive thing (thing with impedance of IMPORTANCE....sigh....) is the ribbon cable. Which I doubt has more than a 0.05dB change in the audio band, and in a former life I was sending 14MHz square waves over 8 feet of ribbon cable no problems.
Does the LIBB simulation data include the ribbon cable?

I made a comparable measurement of a real power system connecting bus bars to a power supply, and measured the impedance of the power rail to ground/0V/gnd on the power distribution. Which I was told by John of Genus Modu is whats in the graphs presented in the white paper. Except instead of simulation I used a single port analyser (assembled from other bits of test equipment that you could do too) which had been calibrated with the short-open-load technique.

How much involvement did you actually have in designing this product? You seem to be ignorant to the actual details of what is presented.


John/Mungo,

My impedance simulation plots do not include the ribbon cable, as you already know. I just want to clear that up for the rest of the thread readers.

Whenever I can get to some measurements I would prefer two port shunt mode for improved low resistance accuracy.

Paul and I conferred on some aspects of each others designs and the data that was presented, but not necessarily everything.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:

paults wrote:
The only reactive thing (thing with impedance of IMPORTANCE....sigh....) is the ribbon cable. Which I doubt has more than a 0.05dB change in the audio band, and in a former life I was sending 14MHz square waves over 8 feet of ribbon cable no problems.
Does the LIBB simulation data include the ribbon cable?

I made a comparable measurement of a real power system connecting bus bars to a power supply, and measured the impedance of the power rail to ground/0V/gnd on the power distribution. Which I was told by John of Genus Modu is whats in the graphs presented in the white paper. Except instead of simulation I used a single port analyser (assembled from other bits of test equipment that you could do too) which had been calibrated with the short-open-load technique.

How much involvement did you actually have in designing this product? You seem to be ignorant to the actual details of what is presented.


John/Mungo,

My impedance simulation plots do not include the ribbon cable, as you already know. I just want to clear that up for the rest of the thread readers.

Whenever I can get to some measurements I would prefer two port shunt mode for improved low resistance accuracy.

Paul and I conferred on some aspects of each others designs and the data that was presented, but not necessarily everything.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Hi John, no problems, I've just been getting tired with Paul adding so much confusion to what has been such a simple matter. We're both very happy with how that data has been presented and it shows how well both types of designs work in the audio range. I don't think it helps to bring up all the minute detail in this thread, but anyway.

The specific probe used was a kelvin type 4 wire head that is a dual port measurement but with a smaller geometry to simulate a single port measurement, to be comparable to the idealised simulation data. The key reply to Paul was to separate his questions about S12 measurements and reinforce this is an S11 single port representation.

Even without expensive probes there are reliable ways to measure down to very small impedances by soldering in probes close to each other:
http://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5935EN.pdf
I'm not going to put up any questionable data that is beyond the limits of the measurement device, it was calibrated and the noise floor was down in the nano-ohm range (0.00000001 ohms) so its very accurate. The basic techniques have been around a long time and even with a very simple configuration you can measure below milliohms easily:
http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-not es/AN-306.pdf
That can easily be replicated with your test equipment, with or without the differential amplifier.

Like I said, for these minute details I just kept it in private messages as the thread is now full of wildly technical detail which is confusing most people who are reading it.
neil.johnson
Mungo wrote:
The basic techniques have been around a long time and even with a very simple configuration you can measure below milliohms easily:
http://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/application-not es/AN-306.pdf

The synchronous AC technique has been around for quite a while. The (ancient by Genus John's standard) HP 4328A uses a similar approach, which avoids many of the problems inherent in DC low resistance measurement methods. For a good write-up of the 4328A try here:
http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/hp4328a/index.html

Neil
stephentrask
Mungo wrote:
Noting that for all the claims I'm a competitor, I don't sell passive bus boards and don't see any need to even enter the market for them as the LIBB is such an excellent option I'll happily recommend it and suggest people buy it if they want a passive bus board to expand a power system.


This was all I needed. I placed my order and will be replacing the flying bus boards in my otherwise excellent Frap Tools Uno case with these.

Mr. Mungo: In your graph, is the green line labeled Bus Bars Measured No Capacitors the LIBB with no capacitors, or some other bus board?
Mungo
stephentrask wrote:
Mungo wrote:
Noting that for all the claims I'm a competitor, I don't sell passive bus boards and don't see any need to even enter the market for them as the LIBB is such an excellent option I'll happily recommend it and suggest people buy it if they want a passive bus board to expand a power system.


This was all I needed. I placed my order and will be replacing the flying bus boards in my otherwise excellent Frap Tools Uno case with these.

Mr. Mungo: In your graph, is the green line labeled Bus Bars Measured No Capacitors the LIBB with no capacitors, or some other bus board?
The green line is the same measurement, but not of a bus board. Thats the result if you use solid bars of copper to distribute the power instead of wires and bus boards. It doesn't have any capacitors on it, some people have asked what the LIBB would look like if it didn't have capacitors but I don't think thats important to know as the LIBB comes with capacitors.

What was important there is that adding capacitors only just starts to make a difference up above 10kHz. For audible frequencies the bigger improvements come from a better power supply and/or lower resistance bus boards and wires, or bus bars. The LIBB does help here but there are other options too and other bus boards connected with very large wires would perform similarly well. The LIBB compared its self to some popular products in their white paper, but there several other vendors who could sell you equally good performing products in the audible frequencies which they have chosen not to compare themselves to.

Beware that the power supply fitted to your case is not able to drive a large amount of capacitance, you may need to use the jumpers on the LIBB to reduce the capacitance and will be limited to what modules can be installed without going past the capabilities of the supply. Its likely the power supply will be limiting your system much more than anything else, the LIBB will be an improvement but probably only a small one.
KSS
@paults- In light of yor UL discussion with neil.johnson, are the Lil Stinker PSU's still on the hopefully near horizon?

Do these use an external transformer to minimize the UL factor? Does an external mains transformer change the UL requirements enough to make the whole proposition of legal power supplies less scary?

Is there a hoped for timeline for release of the Lil Stinkers?

With larger corporations entering the eurorack market, it seems inevitible that getting away with hush hush wink wink power solutions is going to be less and less of an answer.
stephentrask
Mungo wrote:


What was important there is that adding capacitors only just starts to make a difference up above 10kHz. For audible frequencies the bigger improvements come from a better power supply and/or lower resistance bus boards and wires, or bus bars. The LIBB does help here but there are other options too and other bus boards connected with very large wires would perform similarly well. The LIBB compared its self to some popular products in their white paper, but there several other vendors who could sell you equally good performing products in the audible frequencies which they have chosen not to compare themselves to.

Beware that the power supply fitted to your case is not able to drive a large amount of capacitance, you may need to use the jumpers on the LIBB to reduce the capacitance and will be limited to what modules can be installed without going past the capabilities of the supply. Its likely the power supply will be limiting your system much more than anything else, the LIBB will be an improvement but probably only a small one.


Thank you. I definitely have a sufficiently powerful PSU for the case. I actually went back and forth with Simone at Frap Tools when I first got the Uno to find the quietest power supply.

I want to add that I do think that quiet matters in that octave above 10k. Obviously, no one is writing important melodic or harmonic material there but lowering noise levels in that last audible octave adds clarity and precision, revealing the particular sonic characteristics of the modules in one's system. To me, this is especially important at the end of the chain, when the sum of all the modules and the smoggy smear of high end noise that goes with them gets fed to a reverb or some other effect. Feeding a lot of noise to FX defeats the purpose of spending all that time and money picking out the ones that sound best to you.

That's my two sense on the 10k to 20k region.
Mungo
stephentrask wrote:
Mungo wrote:
What was important there is that adding capacitors only just starts to make a difference up above 10kHz. For audible frequencies the bigger improvements come from a better power supply and/or lower resistance bus boards and wires, or bus bars. The LIBB does help here but there are other options too and other bus boards connected with very large wires would perform similarly well. The LIBB compared its self to some popular products in their white paper, but there several other vendors who could sell you equally good performing products in the audible frequencies which they have chosen not to compare themselves to.

Beware that the power supply fitted to your case is not able to drive a large amount of capacitance, you may need to use the jumpers on the LIBB to reduce the capacitance and will be limited to what modules can be installed without going past the capabilities of the supply. Its likely the power supply will be limiting your system much more than anything else, the LIBB will be an improvement but probably only a small one.
Thank you. I definitely have a sufficiently powerful PSU for the case. I actually went back and forth with Simone at Frap Tools when I first got the Uno to find the quietest power supply.

I want to add that I do think that quiet matters in that octave above 10k. Obviously, no one is writing important melodic or harmonic material there but lowering noise levels in that last audible octave adds clarity and precision, revealing the particular sonic characteristics of the modules in one's system. To me, this is especially important at the end of the chain, when the sum of all the modules and the smoggy smear of high end noise that goes with them gets fed to a reverb or some other effect. Feeding a lot of noise to FX defeats the purpose of spending all that time and money picking out the ones that sound best to you.

That's my two sense on the 10k to 20k region.
The particular power supplies installed inside those cases might be sufficiently powerful to provide enough current (amps) but it is unable to drive large capacitive loads. So its likely that you would need to disable the full capacitors on the LIBB which make the extra benefit in that end of the audible region. There are jumpers included on the LIBB to reduce the filtering because so many power supplies have problems running a large amount of capacitance, its not a big change but then all the filtering is above the audible region. You'd probably see a bigger improvement by changing power supplies.
stephentrask
Mungo wrote:
The particular power supplies installed inside those cases might be sufficiently powerful to provide enough current (amps) but it is unable to drive large capacitive loads. So its likely that you would need to disable the full capacitors on the LIBB which make the extra benefit in that end of the audible region. There are jumpers included on the LIBB to reduce the filtering because so many power supplies have problems running a large amount of capacitance, its not a big change but then all the filtering is above the audible region. You'd probably see a bigger improvement by changing power supplies.


Well, I guess I'll find out. I have the LIBB ordered from CTRL. They are on their way. They will be installed by Patch:Work in Brooklyn,NY. If Peter at Patch:Work determines the PSU can handle the full capacitance then I will go with that. If not, I still imagine it will be better than flying bus boards. As of now, my power consumption is about 1/7th of the the supply. Hopefully, that's enough headroom to drive these.
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:

What was important there is that adding capacitors only just starts to make a difference up above 10kHz. For audible frequencies the bigger improvements come from a better power supply and/or lower resistance bus boards and wires, or bus bars. The LIBB does help here but there are other options too and other bus boards connected with very large wires would perform similarly well.


LIBB starts reducing noise at 4 KHz, not 10 KHz. As shown in the noise spectrum plots for the attenuverter output, LIBB with the linear PSU and 1 foot of 12 AWG cable starts reducing noise around 4 KHz, comparing it to the other three bus solution noise spectrums. You can also see this filtering more subtly in the OTA VCA spectrum plots. This matches the projection in the Z vs. Frequency charts.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#results04
http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#theory_esr

Any Eurorack bus solution should use the largest gauge (or bundle of cables equaling a large gauge) possible. Most barrier strips and all spade lugs can support 12 AWG wire, but most cabinets are not wired that way due to lack of guidance. Terminal blocks as used on EHA can normaly do 14 AWG wire. Many bus boards lack those connections, or use 16-18 AWG as a default anyway, and some are limited by the number of ground connections.

Mungo wrote:

The LIBB compared its self to some popular products in their white paper, but there several other vendors who could sell you equally good performing products in the audible frequencies which they have chosen not to compare themselves to.


Incorrect. I compared LIBB to common flying bus cables and 1 ounce bus boards as well as the next best bus board available at the time, the 4 ounce bus board. Some other solutions have been mentioned, one never shipped, one is discontinued, a few others that are “close” to the 4 ounce solution but not as good as LIBB were not available at the time of the testing.

Mungo wrote:

Beware that the power supply fitted to your case is not able to drive a large amount of capacitance, you may need to use the jumpers on the LIBB to reduce the capacitance and will be limited to what modules can be installed without going past the capabilities of the supply. Its likely the power supply will be limiting your system much more than anything else, the LIBB will be an improvement but probably only a small one.


Mungo wrote:

The particular power supplies installed inside those cases might be sufficiently powerful to provide enough current (amps) but it is unable to drive large capacitive loads. So its likely that you would need to disable the full capacitors on the LIBB which make the extra benefit in that end of the audible region. There are jumpers included on the LIBB to reduce the filtering because so many power supplies have problems running a large amount of capacitance, its not a big change but then all the filtering is above the audible region. You'd probably see a bigger improvement by changing power supplies.


John/Mungo,

Why are you speculating the Frap Tools Silta PSU cannot drive a LIBB with full capacitors? Have you measured or tested it?

The system referenced by the customer used ribbon cables for power distribution. Changing out to EHA plus LIBB is not a small improvement. There is plenty of data on LIBB and EHA noise measurements and improvements with a typical switching PSU.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/eha.html

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
stephentrask wrote:
Mungo wrote:
The particular power supplies installed inside those cases might be sufficiently powerful to provide enough current (amps) but it is unable to drive large capacitive loads. So its likely that you would need to disable the full capacitors on the LIBB which make the extra benefit in that end of the audible region. There are jumpers included on the LIBB to reduce the filtering because so many power supplies have problems running a large amount of capacitance, its not a big change but then all the filtering is above the audible region. You'd probably see a bigger improvement by changing power supplies.


Well, I guess I'll find out. I have the LIBB ordered from CTRL. They are on their way. They will be installed by Patch:Work in Brooklyn,NY. If Peter at Patch:Work determines the PSU can handle the full capacitance then I will go with that. If not, I still imagine it will be better than flying bus boards. As of now, my power consumption is about 1/7th of the the supply. Hopefully, that's enough headroom to drive these.


Stephen,

Please continue coming directly to me for advice on LIBB and EHA installation. I am happy to help any customer, before or after sale, with their needs.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:

What was important there is that adding capacitors only just starts to make a difference up above 10kHz. For audible frequencies the bigger improvements come from a better power supply and/or lower resistance bus boards and wires, or bus bars. The LIBB does help here but there are other options too and other bus boards connected with very large wires would perform similarly well.


LIBB starts reducing noise at 4 KHz, not 10 KHz. As shown in the noise spectrum plots for the attenuverter output, LIBB with the linear PSU and 1 foot of 12 AWG cable starts reducing noise around 4 KHz, comparing it to the other three bus solution noise spectrums. You can also see this filtering more subtly in the OTA VCA spectrum plots. This matches the projection in the Z vs. Frequency charts.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#results04
http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html#theory_esr

Any Eurorack bus solution should use the largest gauge (or bundle of cables equaling a large gauge) possible. Most barrier strips and all spade lugs can support 12 AWG wire, but most cabinets are not wired that way due to lack of guidance. Terminal blocks as used on EHA can normaly do 14 AWG wire. Many bus boards lack those connections, or use 16-18 AWG as a default anyway, and some are limited by the number of ground connections.
Again we return to your data showing improvements in the audible region when connected to a low impedance linear supply, where you also used heavier and shorter cables to further improve the figures for the LIBB. That will not translate to similar results when you connect it to a higher output impedance power supply.

GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:
The LIBB compared its self to some popular products in their white paper, but there several other vendors who could sell you equally good performing products in the audible frequencies which they have chosen not to compare themselves to.
Incorrect. I compared LIBB to common flying bus cables and 1 ounce bus boards as well as the next best bus board available at the time, the 4 ounce bus board. Some other solutions have been mentioned, one never shipped, one is discontinued, a few others that are “close” to the 4 ounce solution but not as good as LIBB were not available at the time of the testing.
I'm not saying you need to test the other products that have become available since or even that you needed to be aware of every option available the time. You made a comparative test against popular products which is a great way to do it. You agree here there are other options available that will perform similarly well. Especially in the examples where the power supply doesn't have a low enough output impedance and limits the performance of whatever distribution is attached to it.

GenusModu wrote:
Mungo wrote:

Beware that the power supply fitted to your case is not able to drive a large amount of capacitance, you may need to use the jumpers on the LIBB to reduce the capacitance and will be limited to what modules can be installed without going past the capabilities of the supply. Its likely the power supply will be limiting your system much more than anything else, the LIBB will be an improvement but probably only a small one.


Mungo wrote:

The particular power supplies installed inside those cases might be sufficiently powerful to provide enough current (amps) but it is unable to drive large capacitive loads. So its likely that you would need to disable the full capacitors on the LIBB which make the extra benefit in that end of the audible region. There are jumpers included on the LIBB to reduce the filtering because so many power supplies have problems running a large amount of capacitance, its not a big change but then all the filtering is above the audible region. You'd probably see a bigger improvement by changing power supplies.


John/Mungo,

Why are you speculating the Frap Tools Silta PSU cannot drive a LIBB with full capacitors? Have you measured or tested it?

Because I carefully research before making comments, the specific regulator used in that power supply is specified to a maximum capacitance of 1000uF. Between the 771uF on the LIBB and the capacitors already installed on the power supply board its right up against the limit before adding any modules. I wouldn't test it as neither of those products are things I'm investing time and money in, and the specifications say don't do it. Someone could test it and confirm if there are no problems but the evidence so far is that it is likely to be a problem.

Also I've measured the output impedance of enough similar regulators and power supplies to know that very few get to a low enough output impedance that comparing 10mOhm and 30mOhm distribution will make much difference.

GenusModu wrote:
The system referenced by the customer used ribbon cables for power distribution. Changing out to EHA plus LIBB is not a small improvement. There is plenty of data on LIBB and EHA noise measurements and improvements with a typical switching PSU.

http://www.genusmodu.com/products/eha.html

John Loffink
Genus Modu
When you show a small improvement in the power rail noise from 0-2kHz, and then a huge 20-30dB reduction in the output noise at main 60Hz (and its harmonics) it points to more than just the bus board and distribution changed the result and/or a poor measurement technique leading to the wrong conclusion. Can you explain why the bus board made such a large change to the output result? Or was the wiring to earthing changed also? Its not the capacitors thats making a difference down there. Everything is very clear and consistent within the white paper but those results jump out as radically different and questionable.
stephentrask
GenusModu wrote:


Stephen,

Please continue coming directly to me for advice on LIBB and EHA installation. I am happy to help any customer, before or after sale, with their needs.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Of course, John. I am having these professionally installed. Peter is very knowledgeable but if he has any questions I will ask him to contact you.
meta
@GenusModu: I have a Monorocket 9U 120hp case in which I want to replace the power supply and distribution. I'm aiming for 3 LIBBs and a PSU providing at least 2.0A/1.2A/0.3A at +12V/-12V/+5V. I would prefer a PSU internal to the case, using the case's IEC inlet.

I've investigated all of the recommended (and some other) linear PSUs, and it seems that the only configuration that would fit comfortably is a trio of Acopian low-profile, single-output PSUs — an expensive option at ~US$650. Other linear PSUs would have to live in a separate, bulky box. Neither of these options are especially palatable to me.

The Big Stinker would be a perfect fit if it were available.

AFAIK, the only switching/linear hybrid PSU currently available is the Doepfer PSU3. You previously wrote that you can't recommend it, due to lack of published data. Yet it has a good overall reputation qualitatively, and using it with LIBBs would undoubtedly improve it further.

What would you recommend for my specific case?

* 3 LIBBs + Dopefer PSU3
* 3 LIBBs + something else (what?)
* Some other power system (which one?)
Mungo
meta wrote:
@GenusModu: I have a Monorocket 9U 120hp case in which I want to replace the power supply and distribution. I'm aiming for 3 LIBBs and a PSU providing at least 2.0A/1.2A/0.3A at +12V/-12V/+5V. I would prefer a PSU internal to the case, using the case's IEC inlet.

I've investigated all of the recommended (and some other) linear PSUs, and it seems that the only configuration that would fit comfortably is a trio of Acopian low-profile, single-output PSUs — an expensive option at ~US$650. Other linear PSUs would have to live in a separate, bulky box. Neither of these options are especially palatable to me.

The Big Stinker would be a perfect fit if it were available.

AFAIK, the only switching/linear hybrid PSU currently available is the Doepfer PSU3. You previously wrote that you can't recommend it, due to lack of published data. Yet it has a good overall reputation qualitatively, and using it with LIBBs would undoubtedly improve it further.

What would you recommend for my specific case?

* 3 LIBBs + Dopefer PSU3
* 3 LIBBs + something else (what?)
* Some other power system (which one?)
Hello,
though not directed at me I'll throw in a few suggestions that you might not be aware of, there is an excellent hybrid power supply from Malekko:
https://malekkoheavyindustry.com/product/malekko-power/
Like the LIBB it places power connectors on both edges so you might only need two of them to provide enough headers for your case, or it can be extended by a passive board such as the LIBB for more connectors.

Active power boards place the regulators right on the bus board removing all the extra connectors and wires between the power supply and the modules for lower impedance. I'd suggest my active bus boards for you but their power ratings are imbalanced between the +12V and -12V rails so you'd need 3 of them, and the Malekko is probably the best fit.

It is possible to keep the brick inside the case and wired to the IEC inlet if its suitably rated for the temperatures. Or use a enclosed box type psu with the correct output voltage and current for the active boards, there are many choices with 1.5" height to minimise the amount of space they take up inside the case. The Malekko boards can run on 12V inputs so the existing power supplies might already be fine if they have enough current.
GenusModu
meta wrote:
@GenusModu: I have a Monorocket 9U 120hp case in which I want to replace the power supply and distribution. I'm aiming for 3 LIBBs and a PSU providing at least 2.0A/1.2A/0.3A at +12V/-12V/+5V. I would prefer a PSU internal to the case, using the case's IEC inlet.

I've investigated all of the recommended (and some other) linear PSUs, and it seems that the only configuration that would fit comfortably is a trio of Acopian low-profile, single-output PSUs — an expensive option at ~US$650. Other linear PSUs would have to live in a separate, bulky box. Neither of these options are especially palatable to me.

The Big Stinker would be a perfect fit if it were available.

AFAIK, the only switching/linear hybrid PSU currently available is the Doepfer PSU3. You previously wrote that you can't recommend it, due to lack of published data. Yet it has a good overall reputation qualitatively, and using it with LIBBs would undoubtedly improve it further.

What would you recommend for my specific case?

* 3 LIBBs + Dopefer PSU3
* 3 LIBBs + something else (what?)
* Some other power system (which one?)


meta,

I can't recommend the Doepfer PSU3 because it has no specs and I have not tested it.

I am currently researching some other power supply options, but it will take several weeks minimum to come back with a recommendation.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
..deleted...duplicate post
meta
@Mungo: Thanks. I had not considered active busboards. I'll take a look at those.

@GenusModu: I think an interim (before Stinker) solution for mid-to-larger portable systems would open up more potential buyers of the LIBB. Plus I'd be very interested to see a report like your white paper, but varying the power supply (instead of the busboard) between several common Eurorack PSUs. It's difficult for an "advanced layman" like myself to separate fact from fantasy when people here discuss power supply arcana. The data would help, and perhaps bust a few myths as well. thumbs up
Mungo
meta wrote:
@Mungo: Thanks. I had not considered active busboards. I'll take a look at those.
No problem, there are many happy users already using LIBBs to expand their active bus boards. With the GenusModu EHA or other heavier power connectors its quick and simple.
GenusModu
GenusModu wrote:


I am currently researching some other power supply options...



I got back the quote from one of the other power supply options, which coincidentally showed up in another Muff's thread on Monday.

They are low noise switching power supplies from Daitron. Noise is less than 10 mVpp and is extensively documented with waveforms at:
http://daitronglobal.com/products/power/lfs50a.html
http://daitronglobal.com/products/power/lfs150a.html
Click on "electrical characteristics."

Price is $205 for the 50W version, 5 V @ 10 A or 12 V @ 4.2 A, and $295 for the 150W version, 12V @ 12.5A. You would need two 12 V single supplies for +/-12V, so $410 for bipolar +/-12V @ 4.2 A. That is more than twice as expensive as the International Power IHDD15-5.0 open frame linear PSU, or almost as expensive as the Acopian TD12-450 closed frame linear PSU. So there is no real advantage from the cost perspective. Daitron start giving about a 10% discount for quantities of 10 or more.

The benefit of the Daitron PSUs will be smaller size, about 1/4 the volume of the linear PSU solutions, and much lower heat dissipation with 85-86% efficiency instead of 45% efficiency for the linear PSUs.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
meta
Thanks, John. I had my eye on those Daitron units too. In fact, after what I feel is a pretty exhaustive search of the market, I cannot find a better switch-mode power supply.

As Mungo pointed out in another thread, a close competitor is/was the Sanken HWB series, which is discontinued but still available in limited quantities — and considerably less expensive. I spent a good deal of time comparing the datasheets and electrical test results. The Daitron LFS series, in my totally amateur opinion, is slightly better. While the measured ripple and noise are roughly the same with a static load, the Daitron measurements show better response to a dynamic load — 164 mVpp fluctuation over 0.6ms vs. 800mVpp fluctuation over 2ms. The Daitrons also beat the Sankens in power factor, if that is important.

The one question mark for me on the Daitrons is the max capacitive load. The manual states "Please note that an excessive capacitive load can create over current situation.", but does not define what is excessive. The US Daitron office did not have an immediate answer for me, and so they've asked HQ in Japan for an answer. What is good enough for say, 9U of Eurorack? ≥3000 µF, perhaps?
Mungo
meta wrote:
The one question mark for me on the Daitrons is the max capacitive load. The manual states "Please note that an excessive capacitive load can create over current situation.", but does not define what is excessive. The US Daitron office did not have an immediate answer for me, and so they've asked HQ in Japan for an answer. What is good enough for say, 9U of Eurorack? ≥3000 µF, perhaps?
It can be entirely up to your specific set of modules, somewhat like power consumption figures. There are some modules with 1000uF or more, and the LIBB boards have 770uF each (when all capacitors are used) to 3000uF might get used up quickly in a large rack, but typical modules only have 10uF or 100uF exposed to the supply so estimate at least that much per module.

Each power supply will respond differently to too much capacitance, some will simply fail to start (current limiting etc) and people have tricks like turning it on and off quickly a few times. But some power supplies will happily drive more than their maximum capacitance with some parameters outside their other specifications (startup time, transient response etc) so it may or may not be a problem and the easiest way to find out is by testing it.
GenusModu
meta wrote:
Thanks, John. I had my eye on those Daitron units too. In fact, after what I feel is a pretty exhaustive search of the market, I cannot find a better switch-mode power supply.

As Mungo pointed out in another thread, a close competitor is/was the Sanken HWB series, which is discontinued but still available in limited quantities — and considerably less expensive. I spent a good deal of time comparing the datasheets and electrical test results. The Daitron LFS series, in my totally amateur opinion, is slightly better. While the measured ripple and noise are roughly the same with a static load, the Daitron measurements show better response to a dynamic load — 164 mVpp fluctuation over 0.6ms vs. 800mVpp fluctuation over 2ms. The Daitrons also beat the Sankens in power factor, if that is important.

The one question mark for me on the Daitrons is the max capacitive load. The manual states "Please note that an excessive capacitive load can create over current situation.", but does not define what is excessive. The US Daitron office did not have an immediate answer for me, and so they've asked HQ in Japan for an answer. What is good enough for say, 9U of Eurorack? ≥3000 µF, perhaps?


There is no easy answer for maximum capacitive load specification requirements for a Eurorack power supply. The requirement will vary with your module configuration and also tracks your maximum current consumption. Most power supplies do not include the specification and even if you have it you’ll have to test the system to see how it operates.

LIBB capacitance for +/- 12 Volt planes can be adjusted to values of 331, 551 or 771 uF. Module capacitance varies widely. 10, 22 or 47 uF may be commonly used for smaller modules, while hundreds of uF are common for larger models. Those capacitors are often behind diodes or resistors, or sometimes have larger equivalent series resistance of 1 ohm or more, so the charging rate is slower than might be experienced under test conditions.

During LIBB pre-production testing I saw startup issues with a linear power supply, an SL HAA15-0.8-A+ power supply, when fully loaded with modules on LIBB. Reducing the LIBB bulk capacitance was the solution, so jumpers were added for the LIBB A2 production version. I saw no such issues with the Meanwell switching power supply, RD-3513 +/-12V. It started just fine with a full complement of modules approaching its maximum current load. Neither one of these power supplies have a maximum capacitance specification.

If I were to give my preference for a maximum capacitance spec, I would say 2000 uF per LIBB, or 84-104 hp. That accounts for both bus board and module capacitance.

Power factor is the amount of distortion that the inductive and capacitive loading of the power supply high side (100-240 VAC) creates on the input sine wave. This creates power losses at the AC distribution side. The Sanken HWB power factor specs are poor: 0.5 to 0.7, and may explain why they are discontinued. I am accustomed to specs at the 0.95 or better value. Daitron is 0.97 for 100 VAC, for example. Power factor will not impact your DC side power quality though.

For the dynamic load response, superior performance of the Daitrons could be of some help for LED noise mitigation. It is about 4 times better than the Sanken HWB, depending on which charts you use.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
meta
Mungo wrote:
Each power supply will respond differently to too much capacitance, some will simply fail to start ... some power supplies will happily drive more than their maximum capacitance ... so it may or may not be a problem and the easiest way to find out is by testing it.

GenusModu wrote:
Most power supplies do not include the specification and even if you have it you’ll have to test the system to see how it operates.

Thanks for the insights. I'll go ahead and order the Daitrons on Monday — unless the engineers have responded by that time and give a low spec for max capacitive load. It will take me a week or three to get them across the border into Canada, into my case, and populated with modules. Then we'll see how they handle 3 LIBBs and 32ish mostly-analogue modules.

GenusModu wrote:
If I were to give my preference for a maximum capacitance spec, I would say 2000 uF per LIBB, or 84-104 hp. That accounts for both bus board and module capacitance.

Thanks for that and the other advice, John. Very informative.

Another thing to note for anyone considering the Sanken HWB series, since at this time there are still some available: the models with R in the model name have a remote control feature and will not turn on unless you supply an external control voltage. The Daitron LFS series has remote control too, but it works in the opposite way: the Daitron is naturally on, and you can supply an external CV to turn it off — or just ignore the remote control feature, as I intend to do.
hippasus
@meta, whith what configuration did you end up? Do you mind to report?
I am also looking for a companion PSU for the libb (available in Europe) starting considering the PSU 3 doepfer since I have a couple of psu2 so it feels like a natural progression and it will be for a case heavy on digital modules. Maybe the L1? Or fraptools?
Any other recommendations?
microtonal
...
meta
hippasus wrote:
@meta, whith what configuration did you end up?

I bought three Daitron LFS50A power supplies. After obsessing over the choice for much longer than was healthy, I decided that it was worth the cost to keep everything inside my current case. I did not want the complexity of a bulky linear PSU in an ugly external box, and I was dissuaded by reports of humming non-toroidal transformers. I also preferred something with certifications and extensive test data available, which put DIY and many Eurorack manufacturers at a disadvantage. To be clear, I am not an expert, so please do not take my evaluation as anything definitive. I am not qualified to give recommendations.

For wire, I purchased Ancor marine-grade 12 AWG tinned copper wire from Amazon. While advertised as "boat cable", the wire is also labeled as CSA TEW (thermoplastic equipment wire) 105°C 600V FT1, which I understand is a proper wire for this application.

I have a Klein Tools ratcheting crimp tool.
metasonix
Well.....someone reminded me of this thread, mostly because Paul got into it with a few others on Facebook about the Moog/tariff issue (go and look at that if you want to really torture yourself).

This thread brings many lulz although it's very tl;dr at times.

But since the squabble started with Neil Johnson's post, I looked at his website, and saw that he complains on the front page about his Wikipedia edits being fought over (ring modulators). So I could not resist looking further.

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4964#p4964

Free advice to Neil: no matter how tempted you are to "fix" Wikipedia, don't do it. Let it twist in the wind. Because as good as some of the content is, the place is run by complete raving lying assholes. They WILL make your life miserable because that is what they do.
neil.johnson
metasonix wrote:
Well.....someone reminded me of this thread, mostly because Paul got into it with a few others on Facebook about the Moog/tariff issue (go and look at that if you want to really torture yourself).

This thread brings many lulz although it's very tl;dr at times.

But since the squabble started with Neil Johnson's post,

Ooh sorry for missing this update, I unsubbed from this thread because ... Life ... and only just saw metasonix's post.

Anyway...
Quote:
I looked at his website, and saw that he complains on the front page about his Wikipedia edits being fought over (ring modulators). So I could not resist looking further.

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?p=4964#p4964

I post under the Nejo17 handle.

Quote:
Free advice to Neil: no matter how tempted you are to "fix" Wikipedia, don't do it. Let it twist in the wind. Because as good as some of the content is, the place is run by complete raving lying assholes. They WILL make your life miserable because that is what they do.

Wikipedia is not alone in that department.

Oh, yeah, and I need to move my website to another hosting provider as the one I've used for years is going downhill dammit very frustrating

Neil
hippasus
I don't know about squabbles but just to report that I bought the LIBB and it did the job. Polaris stop bleeding and signal/noise improve in a small case 6U 84hp.
neil.johnson
hippasus wrote:
I don't know about squabbles but just to report that I bought the LIBB and it did the job. Polaris stop bleeding and signal/noise improve in a small case 6U 84hp.

Great thumbs up What power system did you have before?

Neil
hippasus
It is a doepfer PSU2, I like it, is linear, silent and enough power for the size, but that particular case was getting more and more digital modules (except for the filters that started to bleed in the system). I concluded that the heavy loaded positive rail was calling for a new or better distribution. I updated the bus for the LIBB and problems went away.
f33d
I am a non-EE musician. I can solder up kits looking at building-pictures, but that is about it. My proudest moment was building the Thomas White/Buchla Quad Resonant LPG simply from ready-built pictures without any knowledge whatsoever. Measuring every resistor prior to soldering, as the kit-bags were not labeled. It took me a few months, but I even found out some mods nobody else did on the forum. w00t

I read through all 17 pages so far. The drama was entertaining, thanks. I think it is only human & should not be avoided. (ok, a little bite tiresome, but often also quite funny - educating us about psychology & philosophy of argumentation & I still like all parties involved: John/Genus, Paul/ST John/Mungo, Ian/Amalgamod - I even missed Metasonix & Hinton in this Clash of the Power Titans).

Here is my scenario, maybe somebody can help?

I have a portable, but already heavy case with 4 x 86HP.
Power Consumption: 2109 mA +12V | 879 mA -12V | 0 mA 5V | Depth: 90 mm | Number of Modules: 18 - everything: from analog to digital with "lots" of cpu.

I mounted one white & one black 4ms RowPower into the wooden side of the case & run a wire from each RowPower's faceplate-backs to the frame with the rails to ground it. That was a suggestion by 4ms & I don't understand how grounding works etc.
I run 1 veeery long FlyingBus-Cable (15 headers each) from each RowPower, which I made myself.
From what I learned in this thread this is quite the shittiest power-setup, lol. When building all this I was naive to think that nobody would leave us musician-consumers with bad setup-options, e.g. the mere existence of the option of the FlyingBus-Cables. But after buying & selling around 50-100 modules, many of them being shitty I learned a LOT about this whole thing of good & bad products made by "professionals".
In my system I heard some noise (extreme cases: hearing the LED-rhythm from another module), but it is just now that I settle on the modules.
So far, so bad....
Additionally I have already installed 3!!! reverb-tanks into my portable case & plan on buying the Springray 2 to feed them. At one point with a different case I had Springray 1 with tanks & it was ok. Sometimes there were some hum-noise-problems, but they got even worse when placing the tank outside the case.
Hm, strangely that didn't shy me away from putting 3 tanks into my new case...

Now my question:
I suppose I would benefit from LIBB instead of my miles-long DIY FlyingBus-Cables, but I also learned that there are even better power solutions. The argument for the LIBB is "retaining investment cost", but when putting together such an instrument which costs around 7k & countless hours of module-research, buying & selling nerve-energy I think I could justify selling my RowPowers & adding 100-200€ for "good power" like upcoming Stinky+LIBB or L1(+LIBB?) or Mungo's Boards (Malekkko wouldn't fit), BUT they would sit close to the reverb-tanks & maybe weight more, if they are linear (L1)? On the other hand the external meanwell-brick I use for the RowPowers also weights something...

So, what would you dandy people recommend in my specific scenario?
Am I crazy for considering 33333 reverb-tanks inside a portable case with all the noise pollution?
How does which kind of power-solution pollute reverb-tanks sitting next to them?
Getting LIBB & testing it with the tanks?
If you want more funny details: I covered the tanks in tin-foil as I read from someone on the net that it might reduce high-freq-noise-pollution.
Please don't stone me to death with your evil laughter.
I just wanted to make some post-avantgarde music & stranded for 5 years in the Eurorack's clusterfuck-maze, which cost me about 3 LPs I never made, but ok, I learned a SHIT-TONNE about audio, hardware, music, modulation & humans etc.
Still, I am tired & I want this to end, but I want to make it right.
Thanks!

GenusModu
f33d,

I suggest looking at the Genus Modu EHA plus LIBB solution to combine with your current Row Power RP40.

I would not recommend adding any linear power supply into a case with 3 reverb tanks. You are likely to pick up unacceptable amounts of 50/60 Hz hum from the internal AC power connections and transformers. There are ways to mitigate that but the most foolproof solution is to keep AC away from the tanks.

Reverb tanks use very low level signals and amplifiers with high gain, so they will be another example of a poor “victim” module that exhibits greater amounts of noise from the power bus. EHA + LIBB will be a good improvement over your current setup with flying bus cable, greatly reducing the power bus noise.

Putting the reverb tanks outside the case will make noise worse due to the low level signal cables, usually twisted pairs.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
paults
How it's done

GenusModu
There's a customer testimonial from composer and sound artist Neil Parfitt over on the Muff Wiggler Facebook page. Neil has a massive 2000 hp system used for professional sound work.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/111029938930272/
JohnLRice
GenusModu wrote:
There's a customer testimonial from composer and sound artist Neil Parfitt over on the Muff Wiggler Facebook page. Neil has a massive 2000 hp system used for professional sound work.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/111029938930272/
Could you repost it here with his permission please? I'm not on Facebook but would like to read what he has to say. Thanks!
GenusModu
Neil said he'd get me a better quote than the one of FB, plus some pictures. I will post when available.
JohnLRice
GenusModu wrote:
Neil said he'd get me a better quote than the one of FB, plus some pictures. I will post when available.
SlayerBadger! Thanks!
Neily2000
Hey, so I'll chime in and give more info / pics after the new year.

So -

Like any big system, lots of weird crap starts to happen in the wild west of engineering standards (aka eurocrack), for me, this is categorized into three areas:

1) Overall Noise Floor

What's the system's audio output signal sitting at, with inputs wide open into my recording system with nothing patched on the euro.

2) Module-specific interference and weirdness

Wild West of designs introduces tons of crap - everything from hum, LED related noises, audio bleed onto the power rails, pitch droop cross patching between cases... high freqeency whines.... gah...

3) Power supply noise

Switching supplies - especially using a whole bunch adding sonics spikes at certain frequencies well above the noise floor.


This stuff only becomes really evident on big systems as it's a cumulative problem.

My full system is around 4000HP and has been a journey to figure out how to power this sucker. This is my 3rd set of complete busboard replacement seatching for that unicorn.

The Quest

For a while, it was via a ton of switching supplies and passive busboards.

Then, I changed to 'noise filtering' passive boards and went linear. A little bit better but still meh compared to any of my professional audio gear.

It was always decent but not excellent. I'd have to do the odd noise reduction pass or super spikey EQ to carve out any high pitched whine.

The Quest Continues

Then, the LIBBS appeared. I actually ordered them almost a year ago the moment they were announced and I was reading through all the documentation and talking to John back and forth a ton.

Seemed like there was finally a solution to really address these kinds of issues. So, I took a chance and bought 40 (have serial #1!)

My System

I didn't want to tear apart my system at the time as i was swamped, and I wanted to have new cases made anyway, so I worked back and forth with Art for the Ears to build 2 x 10 row / 197 HP cases and i'd install the power distribution. That pic of a the wiring a few posts up is me btw.

Fast forward to this week. The cases arrived at the beginning of December and all my work wrapped 2 weeks ago. So, I got to work:

Each case row has 2 LIBBS and the all connect to a centralized set of 4 industrial/commercial power bus bars using 12 gauge 5 conductor wire. 2 for the common. Took forever to rig up.

This then feeds to 2 x Acopian Rackmount Linear supplies running split, as well as a smaller one for the 5 volt.

I had the same power topology on the previous case. The only difference was the busboards and I used the wire that came with them (either 14 or 16gauge - not sure). The wiring going from the bus rails to the PSU's are 20 amp house wiring... the thick copper stuff.


The signal path into the system was also almost identical

before:

Vermona balanced outs to Dangerous Liaison to Neve 8816 insert (Neve ADC) to AES patched into Protools HDX.

Now:

DB25 balanced out expander from WMD Performance Mixer .. the rest is the same.

The result?

I'm not an EE or a scientist. I make synth sounds for movies and write music day in day out for television so my observations are real-world:

My room is calibrated to 79db SPL.

With the inputs at nominal listening/recording the modular, there's nothing. NOTHING. The noise floor from the system is sitting at -80dbfs which is night and day what it used to be.

Gone is the LED interference, clocking blips, bleed from some stupidly noisy modules.

Now: Nothing.
(so it's not NOTHING, but all the garbage is below the noise floor.. you'd have to boost the gain by 30db to be like "ok.. I hear some stuff that isnt just noise). So .. let's call it a 'real world nothing'.)

Granted, I have only 1 of the 2 cases done, but this case completed has ALL the clocks and various digital modules that introduced serious problems before, to point where id have to pull the power on them if not being used.

Even if the second system ups the noise a little, it doesn't matter as the #2 and #3 problems are below the noise floor of the system, which was NOT the case before.

So was it worth spending 4k on busboards, 2 grand on linear supplies and $250 on a spool of massive cable? Absolutely. My eurobeast finally is up to par with other pro outboard gear and synths in the studio.

First time i can say that in 5 years. Clean AF!

I'm DONE with the power/noise quest!

-Neil
JohnLRice
Thanks Neily2000! SlayerBadger!
andybizarre
I should have read this thread from the end, wasted like 2 hours until
Neily2000`s post appeared. Thanks, this is the intel I was looking for!
paults
I said this on pages 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10...45
bobbcorr
paults wrote:
I said this on pages 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10...45


Behold, the transcendent power of a strong customer story.

Now all I need is to see the same thing but for someone with a small (10U 84HP) system with three LIBBS smile

Well done!
infradead
it took me 3 days to slowly slog through all 17 pages of this.

fuck you all / i love you all

thanks / i hate you
2disbetter
bobbcorr wrote:

Now all I need is to see the same thing but for someone with a small (10U 84HP) system with three LIBBS smile


I have a 12U 104hp, or a 6U 208hp system using 3 LIBBS with 4 row power 40s. I had all kinds of hum and noise before. My rack is super LED and digital displays heavy (comparatively). After the LIBBS and new power adapters (The 4ms adapter I bought was absolute junk, but it could have been a fluke) it is all gone. I hear nothing but what I'm supposed to.

I have no tools to show you any kind of measurements however. Reference/obligatory picture:
Todai
I'm thinking about tackling my (acceptable) noise floor.

Admittedly I only cross read the 17 pages before, so excuse any questions that might have been answered before.

Currently running 10u / 138hp with 3006mA +12V / 1229mA - 12V / 0mA 5V on 2 Doepfer PSU3 with 3 Doepfer bus boards .

Yip,lots of digital modules.

Everything goes to WMD PM - WMD MSCL - buffered multiple - Vermona TwinOut - Rokit subwoofer & G4.

Obviously I'm considering LIBB boards (it's not like I claim to understand that white paper...but Paul likes it, so I do) .

Since none of the PSUs from the recommendation list seems to be available in Germany and Doepfer still (?) doesn't publish any specs of the PSU3...how much would I possibly gain from sticking to the PSU3 and replacing the bus boards with LIBBs (apart from non-bleeding nailbeds)?
2disbetter
Todai wrote:

Obviously I'm considering LIBB boards (it's not like I claim to understand that white paper...but Paul likes it, so I do) .


I know, well I hope, you are jokingly saying this, because the creator or co-creator liking something about their own product is not a metric you should ever use to determine if a product is good.
Todai
2disbetter wrote:
Todai wrote:

Obviously I'm considering LIBB boards (it's not like I claim to understand that white paper...but Paul likes it, so I do) .


I know, well I hope, you are jokingly saying this, because the creator or co-creator liking something about their own product is not a metric you should ever use to determine if a product is good.


I guess 'metric' is a typo?

If I understand correctly you're saying 'never trust the manufacturer / co-manufacturer with what they have to say about their product'?
2disbetter
genau, vor allem, wenn du das Werbematerial nicht verstehst.

Precisely, especially if you don't understand their promotional material.

And metric was not a typo it is a unit of measurement. thumbs up
Todai
2disbetter wrote:
genau, vor allem, wenn du das Werbematerial nicht verstehst.

Precisely, especially if you don't understand their promotional material.

And metric was not a typo it is a unit of measurement. thumbs up


Ah.
Todai
Any alternative recommendations?
paults
Quote:
I know, well I hope, you are jokingly saying this, because the creator or co-creator liking something about their own product is not a metric you should ever use to determine if a product is good.


Dear Intel:

I'm looking at upgrading my PC's CPU. I see your i7-8600 is rated to 3.85GHz. However, I NEVER trust the manufacturer for specs and test data. So, I guess I shouldn't buy it.

I suppose there is some segment of the population that wants a "review" for everything: cars, houses, airplanes, dog food?

OK, smartass: show me ANY SINGLE 3rd-party TECHNICAL REVIEW of ANY Euro module EVER. You can't, because there isn't one. Jeezus jumping Christ on a pogo stick.

You have 2 choices: believe our TECHNICAL review, or believe Neil's "I bought 20 of them and they reduced my noise floor considerably".

The end result is: these work. I don't know why that's so hard to understand. You assume a Plaits "works" because Olivier says so. I don't see a certified 'test report' from some mythical 3rd party labs.

I guess it's the standard Muffwiggler "Paul is such an arrogant old fart! Why can't he leave us alone? Next he'll be bringing up shrouded headers! [eyeroll]"
2disbetter
Todai wrote:
Any alternative recommendations?


Despite Paul's extremely disrespectful response, if you look up a few post I actually have already recommended this one.
2disbetter
paults wrote:

Dear Intel:

I'm looking at upgrading my PC's CPU. I see your i7-8600 is rated to 3.85GHz. However, I NEVER trust the manufacturer for specs and test data. So, I guess I shouldn't buy it.

I suppose there is some segment of the population that wants a "review" for everything: cars, houses, airplanes, dog food?

OK, smartass: show me ANY SINGLE 3rd-party TECHNICAL REVIEW of ANY Euro module EVER. You can't, because there isn't one. Jeezus jumping Christ on a pogo stick.

You have 2 choices: believe our TECHNICAL review, or believe Neil's "I bought 20 of them and they reduced my noise floor considerably".

The end result is: these work. I don't know why that's so hard to understand. You assume a Plaits "works" because Olivier says so. I don't see a certified 'test report' from some mythical 3rd party labs.

I guess it's the standard Muffwiggler "Paul is such an arrogant old fart! Why can't he leave us alone? Next he'll be bringing up shrouded headers! [eyeroll]"


Paul,

If I'm a customer, and want a product made in Japan, with promotional material all in Japanese, and admit to the manufacturer I don't understand any of it, and they tell me, "no worries, it is the best thing ever!" how am I not a fool just taking their word for it and buying it?

Now despite your trolling, combative, and disrespectful response to me. Despite the fact that I've bought 4 LIBBS, and 3 Row Power adapter kits.
Despite the fact that I have defended and recommended this product repeatedly in this thread and in fact a mere few responses above this have recommended it again; what is your problem?

Your freaking trolling for attention and drama is beyond annoying. In my face you wouldn't say any of this, yet you persist here repeatedly to belittle anyone with an opinion contrary to yours.
paults
I know, it's OK for YOU to troll ME. I get that (meaning, you bought LIBBs even though you didn't "trust" the data). That's some Class A trolling right there.

I get that in the world of 'social media', everyone has "equal voice". My 35+ years designing electronics, from CAT scanners to Euro, the 2 EE degrees, etc. are equal to YOU saying "I dunno, they made their own measurements....." without even referring to them.

I get that manufacturers are supposed to "stand by and take it" when people say obvious incorrect TECHNICAL things (not understanding impedance versus resistance, in this thread is an example). Because, OBVIOUSLY, everything WE say is "tainted", and everything YOU say is "OK".

No, I do not 'enjoy it' But obviously many people do. It's a Muff's thing. But here's hoping that people can differentiate between an EE talking about something TECHNICAL and Random Internet Person typing in a post. Guinness ftw!
2disbetter
paults wrote:
I know, it's OK for YOU to troll ME. I get that (meaning, you bought LIBBs even though you didn't "trust" the data). That's some Class A trolling right there.

I get that in the world of 'social media', everyone has "equal voice". My 35+ years designing electronics, from CAT scanners to Euro, the 2 EE degrees, etc. are equal to YOU saying "I dunno, they made their own measurements....." without even referring to them.

I get that manufacturers are supposed to "stand by and take it" when people say obvious incorrect TECHNICAL things (not understanding impedance versus resistance, in this thread is an example). Because, OBVIOUSLY, everything WE say is "tainted", and everything YOU say is "OK".

No, I do not 'enjoy it' But obviously many people do. It's a Muff's thing. But here's hoping that people can differentiate between an EE talking about something TECHNICAL and Random Internet Person typing in a post. Guinness ftw!


Despite you trying to paint it that way, I'm not trolling you. My advice was rational and fair. Just because you don't like it, and think because you have experience everyone should bow down and believe everything you say is the height of arrogance and belies everyone else's education.

If someone doesn't understand your technical then it counts for nought in their understanding and my advice is still rational and fair. I don't see why you are taking such an issue with this.

Don't you understand the ends don't justify the means?
Todai
OK...now that you've both thrown your rocks...

Back to the question.

Keep PSU3 and add LIBB - good idea yes / no and why?
paults
Yes, you will see an improvement. The LIBB is specifically designed to filter noise from switching power supplies like the PSU3.

There is no alternative with such filtering performance. No matter WHO takes the measurements screaming goo yo It's peanut butter jelly time!
Todai
paults wrote:
Yes, you will see an improvement. The LIBB is specifically designed to filter noise from switching power supplies like the PSU3.

There is no alternative with such filtering performance. No matter WHO takes the measurements screaming goo yo It's peanut butter jelly time!


That's what I wanted to hear!

Next stop Schneiders Laden!



Paul - I'm a fan of your knowledge and engineering work. And I'm surely not the first to tell you that you're completely wasting your precious time on those rants, am I?

Telling you what to do with your time would obviously be like joining the herd of trolls...but there's people waiting for Stinkers, both Big and Small... wink
paults
Quote:
If someone doesn't understand your technical then it counts for nought in their understanding and my advice is still rational and fair. I don't see why you are taking such an issue with this.


Because it's ONLY applied to ME. Ever.

If MakeNoise says: Rene II outputs -5V to +5V, do YOU say "HEY NOT SO FAST!!! I want a [mythical] 3rd party to measure that, buckoo! Because I, and nor should ANYONE ELSE for that matter, trust what a manufacturer says!"

Who is being 'silly' here?

And if you fall back to "yeah but........the LIBB docs are not the same thing. They require an advanced understanding" which, BTW, is the correct response. BUT, you then flaty brush off the contents as being "tainted" [which is EXACTLY what you are saying, 1 step from claiming we LIED about it], is what YOU don't get. Now do you "see my point"?

If Intellijel says "this new VCA draw 24ma off +12V" do you post "I dunno, that's Intellijel's own data.....I DUNNO!!!.."

Of course you don't . NO ONE DOES.

But, it I post "here is 20 pages of measurements, EXACTLY how we made them" it's back to "I DUNNO......."
paults
partly it's a "waste" [at this point, I expect several "I'M SELLING ALL MY SYNTHTECH YOU HORRIBLE PERSON!! posts], but partly my hope is showing that

a) not all "posts are equal" when it comes to technical discussions.
b) I just want to be treated like everyone else (which on Muff's is asking a lot)

In fact, please watch this video where I talk about this EXACT SAME thing, 6 months ago. The thing that just happened.

It's nothing new, really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBGyEBQnIws
MvK
paults wrote:


But, it I post "here is 20 pages of measurements, EXACTLY how we made them" it's back to "I DUNNO......."


Maybe one reason for this are the numerous threads where designers of PSUs or busboards are jelling at each other. Another reason might be many shitty PSUs out there and people who buy them.
2disbetter
And Paul, taking your angst out on me when you're mad at others is childish. Show where I have tried to do what you are claiming even once. I simply gave someone what I considered to be sound advice.
Todai
paults wrote:
partly it's a "waste" [at this point, I expect several "I'M SELLING ALL MY SYNTHTECH YOU HORRIBLE PERSON!! posts], but partly my hope is showing that

a) not all "posts are equal" when it comes to technical discussions.
b) I just want to be treated like everyone else (which on Muff's is asking a lot)

In fact, please watch this video where I talk about this EXACT SAME thing, 6 months ago. The thing that just happened.

It's nothing new, really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBGyEBQnIws


Oh I've been watching that video the day it was up.

Also the last one together with Robert Rich.

Time spent well as opposed to...ah,you know.

DNFTT
paults
Certainly, many comments directed my way were from a few people with competing products.

I'll again demonstrate the EE way of thinking versus the Muff way of thinking

Comment posted: "The LIBB has the lowest impedance across the frequencies used by Euro switchers. Therefore, it has the lowest noise and here is data"

EE response: That's really exciting! I'll read the data, and do my own research myself to see if these claims and measurement procedures are viable. Maybe I should buy one and compare myself. If the LIBB truly reduces noise and crosstalk, I will study it close and maybe Paul will share some info.

Muff response 1: Info is TAINTED
Muff response 2: Paul's an arrogant prick!
Muff response #3: SELL ALL THE SYNTHTECH!
Muff response #4: Not matter what you say, because YOU said it....pffftttt!!!!

Now that we all got our entertainment value for today, if anyone has questions I'll be more than happy to answer them. Even if you don't like me, or what I say. Or even remotely believe me.
Mungo
Todai wrote:
I'm thinking about tackling my (acceptable) noise floor.

Currently running 10u / 138hp with 3006mA +12V / 1229mA - 12V / 0mA 5V on 2 Doepfer PSU3 with 3 Doepfer bus boards .

Obviously I'm considering LIBB boards (it's not like I claim to understand that white paper...but Paul likes it, so I do) .

Since none of the PSUs from the recommendation list seems to be available in Germany and Doepfer still (?) doesn't publish any specs of the PSU3...how much would I possibly gain from sticking to the PSU3 and replacing the bus boards with LIBBs (apart from non-bleeding nailbeds)?
The PSU3 is quite good, its unlikely to be the limiting factor in your case. To get the most out of upgrading you bus boards you'll also need to change the wiring. The wiring that Doepfer uses and supplies with their bus boards is matched for size, they wire their cases with an excellent layout which can be copied but if you upgrade only one of the cabling or busboards you'll only see a smaller improvement.
Todai
Mungo wrote:
Todai wrote:
I'm thinking about tackling my (acceptable) noise floor.

Currently running 10u / 138hp with 3006mA +12V / 1229mA - 12V / 0mA 5V on 2 Doepfer PSU3 with 3 Doepfer bus boards .

Obviously I'm considering LIBB boards (it's not like I claim to understand that white paper...but Paul likes it, so I do) .

Since none of the PSUs from the recommendation list seems to be available in Germany and Doepfer still (?) doesn't publish any specs of the PSU3...how much would I possibly gain from sticking to the PSU3 and replacing the bus boards with LIBBs (apart from non-bleeding nailbeds)?
The PSU3 is quite good, its unlikely to be the limiting factor in your case. To get the most out of upgrading you bus boards you'll also need to change the wiring. The wiring that Doepfer uses and supplies with their bus boards is matched for size, they wire their cases with an excellent layout which can be copied but if you upgrade only one of the cabling or busboards you'll only see a smaller improvement.


'Matched for size' sounds good!

Do you happen to have the exact diameter? Millimeters would be best since I'm living in the imperial part of the world?
paults
wiring is in standard sizes called 'AWG', and a small number is a THICKER wire (yes, bass-ackwards)

You need at least 14ga (AWG14 or what we call 14 gauge) 10AWG preferred.

For a 2 row case 14 AWG is fine, but for a 3 or 4 row use 12 AWG ot 10 AWG if you can find it.

These thicker wires can be found in marine/boat supply stores (well, in the USA at least) cheaper than other places.
Todai
paults wrote:
wiring is in standard sizes called 'AWG', and a small number is a THICKER wire (yes, bass-ackwards)

You need at least 14ga (AWG14 or what we call 14 gauge) 10AWG preferred.

For a 2 row case 14 AWG is fine, but for a 3 or 4 row use 12 AWG ot 10 AWG if you can find it.

These thicker wires can be found in marine/boat supply stores (well, in the USA at least) cheaper than other places.


Thanks! thumbs up

(Probably) last question... I'm afraid the grounding of the rails might have turned out a bit...dodgy. Please don't ask for a picture. It's dreadful.

I've read that the the surface of anodized amuminum is a bad conductor? So...would it be sufficient to scrape the surface? Or better tap a thread and screw the eyelet connector to the rails?
paults
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!
Todai
paults wrote:
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!


Sooo...no grounding the rails? eek!

Grounding via the ribbon cable is sufficient?
paults
There are 6 conductors used in the ribbon for grounding.

It's not great, but it's better than using the rails Rockin' Banana!
JohnLRice
Todai wrote:
paults wrote:
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!


Sooo...no grounding the rails? eek!

Grounding via the ribbon cable is sufficient?
If you want lower resistance connections to your modules you can get power cables made with heavier gauge discrete wire, like from Hinton Instruments

and Modular Addict

Of course you can buy the parts and tools to do them yourself. too
Todai
JohnLRice wrote:
Todai wrote:
paults wrote:
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!


Sooo...no grounding the rails? eek!

Grounding via the ribbon cable is sufficient?
If you want lower resistance connections to your modules you can get power cables made with heavier gauge discrete wire, like from Hinton Instruments

and Modular Addict

Of course you can buy the parts and tools to do them yourself. too


Interesting. Again, I know little about it - but keeping resistance as low as possible seems to be the goal?

I've crimped one ribbon cable so far. Didn't look like any bigger gauge would fit. Are these different connectors than the ones we're used to?

Edit: by the looks they obviously are. I'll see if I can source those.

Recommended AWG? Surely not 12? woah
noisewreck
Todai wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
Todai wrote:
paults wrote:
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!


Sooo...no grounding the rails? eek!

Grounding via the ribbon cable is sufficient?
If you want lower resistance connections to your modules you can get power cables made with heavier gauge discrete wire, like from Hinton Instruments

and Modular Addict

Of course you can buy the parts and tools to do them yourself. too


Interesting. Again, I know little about it - but keeping resistance as low as possible seems to be the goal?

I've crimped one ribbon cable so far. Didn't look like any bigger gauge would fit. Are these different connectors than the ones we're used to?

Edit: by the looks they obviously are. I'll see if I can source those.

Recommended AWG? Surely not 12? woah


Here are links to the products if you want to make your own:

https://www.pololu.com/product/1930
https://www.pololu.com/category/70/crimp-connector-housings
Mungo
Todai wrote:
paults wrote:
Umm.. never attach signal ground to the mounting rails.

Aluminum is a BAD conductor, the surface of the Euro panels is oxidized/coated by the MetalPhoto process.

And yes, Bob Moog got it wrong in 1967. Sorry, Bob!


Sooo...no grounding the rails? eek!
The full answer is much more complex and begins with "it depends". The rails may or may not need to be firmly/securely connected to mains earth for safety depending on how the rest of the wiring is arranged, for Europe an applicable standard is EN60065. The way Doepfer have arranged and assembled the wiring in their cases means they do not need to have the rails connected, but other metal work in the case still is. Most cases that use bricks and aren't required to have the earthing for safety make no connection to the rails and let the modules make the connection themselves. Additionally, how and where to connect the chassis to mains earth is a controversial topic for audio products!

Todai wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
If you want lower resistance connections to your modules you can get power cables made with heavier gauge discrete wire, like from Hinton Instruments
http://www.hinton-instruments.co.uk/images/paprod/pconn_euro.jpg
and Modular Addict
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/userpix2/198_modlaraddict_1.png
Of course you can buy the parts and tools to do them yourself. too


Interesting. Again, I know little about it - but keeping resistance as low as possible seems to be the goal?

I've crimped one ribbon cable so far. Didn't look like any bigger gauge would fit. Are these different connectors than the ones we're used to?

Edit: by the looks they obviously are. I'll see if I can source those.

Recommended AWG? Surely not 12? woah
Each of the wires in those plug in headers is 22AWG or 20AWG, there are 6 in parallel for the 0V connection. That is equivalent to using a single 14AWG cable of the same length. Those heavier power cables only make a difference if the rest of the power system is almost perfect, as a way to connect the modules to bus boards its a small effect which can be measured:
http://mungo.com.au/euroPowerReal.html
A practical use for heavier 16pin cables is for plugging bus boards into other power supplies with 16pin headers. Genusmodu offer a similar product with their EHA:
http://genusmodu.com/products/eha.html
It can be used in more ways and uses two 14AWG cables for the 0V connection, so is lower resistance by length than the others.
JohnLRice
Todai wrote:
Recommended AWG? Surely not 12? woah
Hinton uses 20AWG,
http://www.hinton-instruments.co.uk/paprod/psu/cables.htm

Modular Addict uses 22 AWG:
https://modularaddict.com/premium-eurorack-power-cables

Below is info on connectors from another thread:
schenkzoola wrote:
Those are Mini-PV connectors, sometimes referred to as DuPont connectors.

Here are some DigiKey links:
10P - https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/amphenol-fci/65043-032LF/609 -2374-ND/1002689

16P - https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/amphenol-fci/65043-029LF/609 -2371-ND/1002686

You will need to buy the crimp contacts separately, and which one you use will depend on what wire you are using.

If you go to the product pages, DigiKey lists the pins in the "Associated Product" section.


But . . . before you buy connectors and wire, check out prices on the crimping tool! eek! Unless you are going to do a LOT of crimping or money is no object, you might consider just buying ready made cables? hihi
EDIT: actually there are inexpensive crimping tools under $40 which isn't bad. I had glanced at a $1,400 tool on Digikey and was like woah Dead Banana
noisewreck
JohnLRice wrote:


But . . . before you buy connectors and wire, check out prices on the crimping tool! eek! Unless you are going to do a LOT of crimping or money is no object, you might consider just buying ready made cables? hihi
EDIT: actually there are inexpensive crimping tools under $40 which isn't bad. I had glanced at a $1,400 tool on Digikey and was like woah Dead Banana


In the links I provided above they also list a crimping tool for $29.95:
https://www.pololu.com/product/1929
paults
My references to wire gauge was from the output of the PSU3 terminals to the screw terminals of the LIBB.

Not from the LIBB to individual modules.

I have and use the ones from Modular Addict, they are well-made.
2disbetter
paults wrote:

I have and use the ones from Modular Addict, they are well-made.


I can second this. Although you might need mini zip ties to keep the cables from going everywhere as they are loose. Not a problem on smaller cables, but on their longer sets it can become a tacky cable salad behind your modules.
Todai
paults wrote:
My references to wire gauge was from the output of the PSU3 terminals to the screw terminals of the LIBB.

Not from the LIBB to individual modules.

I have and use the ones from Modular Addict, they are well-made.



I looked at the parts and the crimping tool - when buying at small quantities it's way more expansive than the ones from modular addict. Even with shipping to Germany! eek!
Todai
That grounding issue is confusing, indeed!

Seems to be a 50/50 split. Some recommend to connect the ground from mains to the rails, some don't.

Since I never had an issue with ground loops (I know Paul, it's an outdated / incorrect term) I'll leave it the way it is.

If the noise floor doesn't improve with all that trans atlantic wiring I might adress that later (probably it's got nothing to do with noise floor and Paul's going to knock me over the head... Mr. Green)
GenusModu
As usual I missed most of the excitement.

I have not tested the Doepfer PSU3, so it is not on my list. After testing quite a few euro power supplies with poor results, I do not intend to spend any more money on unspecified units.

Paul is correct that the highly tuned capacitive dampening of LIBB will improve just about any power supply with switching transients. You can see the results in the EHA product page and the Euro Power and Distribution white paper section with the Meanwell power supply.

The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price. I've tried the Pololu parts and you need an expensive wire with thin insulation to fit the larger wire sizes.

The power cables between your bus board and module do not have any relationship to common impedance coupled noise. They do have some impact on noise from patching across modules with variations in the ground references. Bus board noise is much worse than patching noise. In tests with EHA assemblies as power cables, I saw a few dB difference for patch induced noise, but only at high frequencies, 16 KHz and 45 KHz, and at frequency levels less than -110 dBFS. I did not test at higher frequencies.

John
Todai
GenusModu wrote:
As usual I missed most of the excitement.

I have not tested the Doepfer PSU3, so it is not on my list. After testing quite a few euro power supplies with poor results, I do not intend to spend any more money on unspecified units.

Paul is correct that the highly tuned capacitive dampening of LIBB will improve just about any power supply with switching transients. You can see the results in the EHA product page and the Euro Power and Distribution white paper section with the Meanwell power supply.

The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price. I've tried the Pololu parts and you need an expensive wire with thin insulation to fit the larger wire sizes.

The power cables between your bus board and module do not have any relationship to common impedance coupled noise. They do have some impact on noise from patching across modules with variations in the ground references. Bus board noise is much worse than patching noise. In tests with EHA assemblies as power cables, I saw a few dB difference for patch induced noise, but only at high frequencies, 16 KHz and 45 KHz, and at frequency levels less than -110 dBFS. I did not test at higher frequencies.

John


From the horses mouth, so to speak. I'm not supposed to believe any of that, right?! Mr. Green

As for the LIBBs - I'm sold on these, already.

The transatlantic wiring of the modules itself... I did some asking around and searched extensively. The biggest German supplier for electronics (German...you know... Vorsprung durch Technik and all...) does not even stock connectors other than the standard ones for ribbon cable. They didn't even have the faintest idea on where to get them... seriously, i just don't get it

So Modular Addict truly has a great offer. So again...place an order, wait...wait some more...and hope that the guy at the customs is not too obstipated on the day of arrival. Or else... Bop!
neil.johnson
GenusModu wrote:
The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price.

From the pictures I've seen on the Modular Addict website there didn't appear to be any sleeving to stop the (upto) 16 wires from tangling into a ratsnest as 2disbetter has found. For a "premium" product I would have expected some Hellerman sleeves or expandable sleeving slipped over the bundle before termination.

Neil
Todai
neil.johnson wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price.

From the pictures I've seen on the Modular Addict website there didn't appear to be any sleeving to stop the (upto) 16 wires from tangling into a ratsnest as 2disbetter has found. For a "premium" product I would have expected some Hellerman sleeves or expandable sleeving slipped over the bundle before termination.

Neil


So I guess you're offering something better or know where to get it?
neil.johnson
Todai wrote:
neil.johnson wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price.

From the pictures I've seen on the Modular Addict website there didn't appear to be any sleeving to stop the (upto) 16 wires from tangling into a ratsnest as 2disbetter has found. For a "premium" product I would have expected some Hellerman sleeves or expandable sleeving slipped over the bundle before termination.

Neil


So I guess you're offering something better or know where to get it?

Zip ties as 2disbetter suggested...

Neil
Todai
neil.johnson wrote:
Todai wrote:
neil.johnson wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
The Modular Addict discrete wire power cables are nicely made and quite inexpensive. I do not believe you can make your own for their price.

From the pictures I've seen on the Modular Addict website there didn't appear to be any sleeving to stop the (upto) 16 wires from tangling into a ratsnest as 2disbetter has found. For a "premium" product I would have expected some Hellerman sleeves or expandable sleeving slipped over the bundle before termination.

Neil


So I guess you're offering something better or know where to get it?

Zip ties as 2disbetter suggested...

Neil


Ah...
paults
Meanwhile, at least someone gets it

Todai
Holy moly! eek!
Jalopy
paults wrote:
Meanwhile, at least someone gets it



Teach me your ways exalted one.
GenusModu
The image is from Neil Parfitt's system. The bus bars shown are great for large scale distribution when going more than 18 inches or so. The 3mmx10mm copper bus bar has 89 micro-ohms of resistance over 6 inches, compared to 730 micro-ohms for 12 gauge wire.

Here's a link to the pictured bus bars and accessories: https://www.asi-ez.com/member/x500-Busbars-and-Terminals.asp
Jalopy
we're not worthy
Jalopy
Short of lack of portability and increased price,,, why have I never seen this in practice except for when in practice at substations in my EE life...?

Seems like the grail as far as a home / studio case would go.
BTG
So if one wanted to build a new case with these, but has no EE experience, what's the right way to ensure that it's designed and implemented appropriately? I currently have 15U x 234HP using 3 Intellijel (TPS80W) systems with about 9-11 bus boards (can't remember exact #).

Thinking about going to a larger system (21U x 234HP) and if I do that would like to bite the bullet with an LIBB system.
2disbetter
Jalopy wrote:
Short of lack of portability and increased price,,, why have I never seen this in practice except for when in practice at substations in my EE life...?

Seems like the grail as far as a home / studio case would go.


Because this is for a professional's extra large eurorack system; Someone making and producing things for the industry.

There is a usually a wide margin between consumer and professional. The majority of people on this forum, I'd ration are in the consumer camp.
paults
You don't need bussbars to get improved perfoamance.

Using 12ga, tinned and stranded wire from the LIBBs to the power supply is a good start.
GenusModu
BTG wrote:
So if one wanted to build a new case with these, but has no EE experience, what's the right way to ensure that it's designed and implemented appropriately? I currently have 15U x 234HP using 3 Intellijel (TPS80W) systems with about 9-11 bus boards (can't remember exact #).

Thinking about going to a larger system (21U x 234HP) and if I do that would like to bite the bullet with an LIBB system.


Email me at genome@genusmodu.com for system design consultation.
GenusModu
Consumer or professional should be enabled for the quietest system that can be built. It should not be exclusive only to professionals. If you are building with LIBB I will help to ensure that the entire system is built for best possible performance.

I recommend bus bars for larger system distribution where wire lengths would exceed 18-24 inches. Neil Parfitt’s system is huge so it definitely requires bus bars to avoid 3 to 5 feet of wire length back to the power supplies. Once you get to a 15U system bus bars should be considered for distribution to LIBB.

I am reminding again that LIBB provides the high frequency dampening that you cannot get with a pure bus bar system. It takes all of the capacitors on LIBB including the small MLCC caps to provide the response out to 6-10 MHz.

I offer full consultations for any questions with LIBB installations.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Neily2000
Update: Both cases are complete with the LIBB transition. 40 in all.

The noise floor increased slightly, as to be expected running adding another 2000hp of modules to a single power source.

However, it's still under the threshold of noticeable in a real-world studio situation.. aka... there is nothing detrimental added to the sounds I'm making. It just sounds like any other piece of professional gear.

Scientific result: I'm so f##cking happy. The end. hyper



Todai
neil.johnson


Hey Neil...

Driving home from Schneiders Laden with 2 LIBBs...

Quick question - does it make sense to tin the wires before sticking them into the terminals?


Thanks
neil.johnson
Todai wrote:
neil.johnson


Hey Neil...

Driving home from Schneiders Laden with 2 LIBBs...

Quick question - does it make sense to tin the wires before sticking them into the terminals?


Thanks

I would not recommend it. If you tin the wires it will be much harder for the copper strands to flow into the joint as you tighten them up. Much better to make a nice clean stripped end of the bare copper strands and fill the space in the terminal block. Just be a little careful with the tightening of the terminals as I believe the only thing holding the terminal block to the PCB is the five soldered joints.

Maybe post a photo of the prepared ends just before you make the connection?

And you have two GROUND terminals so make full use of them smile

Neil
GenusModu
Todai wrote:
neil.johnson


Hey Neil...

Driving home from Schneiders Laden with 2 LIBBs...

Quick question - does it make sense to tin the wires before sticking them into the terminals?


Thanks


Agreeing with Neil, soldering the stranded wire ends will make a worse connection. You want the strands to "be smashed" into the gap between the barrier strip screw head and and base plate to maximize contact area. That is how the barrier strips are designed to work.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Todai
So wiring done...all lights light up, no magic smoke, nothing gets hot, my (least cherished) module lights up when connected...

The only thing that irritates me is the frickin wiring guide for the PSU3 (remind me to get rid of those next Christmas!).

For whatever reason Dieter wants me to not ground the PSUs, but the rails / case. I chose to ignore that and connected ground to the PSUs and subsequently the LIBBs from the PSUs ground terminal.

Before I install 37 modules....am I good? razz
Leverkusen
As fas as I understood it, both PSU's/distro boards should share the same 0V which should also be connected to ground. The case/panels should also be grounded to mains, but not directly to 0V as in the Doepfer pic.

I am curious how this question evolves!
GenusModu
Todai,

That seems like a really large case, maybe 4 rows high and 126 hp wide? Are you planning to add more bus boards in the future?

For LIBB system installations make sure you review the LIBB System Wiring Guide: http://www.genusmodu.com/files/LIBB/LIBB-wiring-guide-1_00.pdf.

For the safety ground the Doepfer PSU3 does show the recommended practice of grounding directly to the metal chassis, then carrying the ground to the PSU or bus board. If you have a wood cabinet this practice makes less sense. You can try to ground to your system's aluminum mounting rails but panels with anodized or painted panels will tend to defeat the intended purpose of grounding for prevention of electrical shock.

Every LIBB wiring should use both ground connections wherever possible, to improve the system immunity to common impedance coupling. The PSU3s have multiple ground connections, so use as many as needed.

There should be a ground connection between the two bus boards. This helps reduce patching noise between the two PSU3 sections due to differential in the ground voltages. However, do not ever connect the voltage outputs together between multiple power supplies.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Todai
Hey John,

Thanks for the answer! Sure enough I grew impatient with all my modules on the floor and went ahead...

It's 10U 138hp. 3157 mA +12V | 1585 mA -12V | 0 mA 5V Two PSU3, one on one to the LIBBs.

I came to the same conclusion about Dieters wiring recommendation - it's for the metal cases. After wiring I checked with my multimeter. All good except a deviation of 0,1V on +12.
There's ground on all the jacks and the cut sides of the modules - but not on the anodized surfaces of the face plates so yes - anodized aluminum is a bad conductor.

The only reason I could think of for (trying to) ground the rails is the danger of an electric shock. Which could only happen if the mains touch them. Which, the way I wired everything, would involve some sort of...traffic accident. In which case...ehm, you get the picture... Mr. Green

The only thing I did not do is connecting ground in between the bus boards. Because it's not in the printed manual (version 1.01). If you say it's critical...matter of removing 4 modules. Since these bus boards are so SLEEK!
Seriously - a JOY to install them and to connect the modules. All components tugged away. Screw terminal housings sit flush against the bottom - no danger of braking anything when tightening the terminal screws. And SHROUDED connectors! No more fingernail torture when swapping modules! thumbs up
GenusModu
Todai,

The LIBB System Wiring Guide guides for a single power supply system so your scenario was not fully covered.

There will be a difference in patch cord induced noise when the grounds are not directly coupled between bus systems. It is no different than if you are patching between two cases with independent power supplies and no direct ground connection. Since you are already wired up I suggest you try it and test for noise.

A typical test would be to patch generators and processors between the two power busses, and then patch a series of mixers with no inputs across them as well. Measure at the final output in the mixer chain for noise with a good 24 bit DAW interface and FFT. This process is subject to variability based on the modules used and how they are patched.

While the electrical theory shows that a low impedance ground across all devices is the best, I have never seen empirical data that quantifies the amount of induced noise. Based upon some limited testing that I have done, I expect the patch induced noise level to be much lower than the common impedance coupled noise that is improved by LIBB.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Todai
Some final (?) words....there is SILENCE

Incredible. My standards of 'acceptable noise floor' have just changed considerably. When before I could crank the output (with no signal) to about 12 o'clock before I heard all the flavours of my Quantum Rainbow I can now go all the way close to max without hearing anything.


Which brings up the next challenge - that crackle on my speakers every time my fridge switches on / off.

But that's just another can o'worms which we shouldn't open. Or should we? Mr. Green
Todai
Now...since neither Furman / Nortek nor the German distributor could answer my questions I simply ordered the Furman ac6- 210 AE. 14 days no questions asked return policy by Thomann.

So let's try without the power conditioner, first.

Picture me, sitting at my desk. Volume knob WIDE open, same for the door of the ubiquitous noisy fridge, waiting for the beast to kick into gear and emit that dreaded noise.

Fridge starts compressor.

Nothing.

Fridge stops compressor.

Nothing.

hmmm.....

Correct me in case I'm missing something ; but those LIBBs seem to be able to filter that noise?!

seriously, i just don't get it
GenusModu
Todai,

LIBB is neither designed nor tested for reduction of motor induced noise. I won't make any claims there without some methodology to back them up.

My own studio/lab is on a separate circuit from compressors or motors, and I run audio equipment through Tripplite surge protectors with isolated filter banks, so I do not experience noise problems as you have seen. I also do not have the equipment to induce noise spikes on the AC lines.

The Furman conditioners provide additional goodness beyond the noisy fridge issues.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Leverkusen
I am about to build a new case for my system and wonder if my plans regarding power upgrade with LIBB's makes any sense.

Currently I have two small cases (both 208 HP), one with a Make Noise switched PSU, one with a linear Doepfer PSU2.

I plan to build a studio case now (680 HP, 64 modules +400 mA, -2000mA) powered by the PSU2 and a bigger linear Bel PSU I have here. Of course I will need more bus boards now and want to try the LIBB's. The goal to have them in a linear power system would be to prevent inter module influences. Though my plan is to also reuse the two Doepfer bus boards.

Now my question is if this makes any sense or if different bus boards in one system would rather introduce more problems as they probably are different in impedance?

One thought I had was to at least use one type of bus board with one PSU. Of course both PSU's would share a common 0V.
Rex Coil 7
Beautiful and interesting hybrid design by Member *sduck which employs bus boards with tin plated copper bus bars and linear power supplies.

The wonder that is ~modular synths~ ... so flexible in it's overall design that it allows for combining various pieces of tech in such ways as to satisfy the needs and wants of many folks.


sduck wrote:
So instead of having my euro stuff spread out over 2 mantis cases and a variety of other things, now I have this thing -



I literally just finished it a few minutes ago, so no modules in it yet.

A close up of the power section -



And to give it some mojo, even though these will never be seen -



Oh, and it has some extra bonus bling just for fun (the power for this is well outside of the case) - rgb leds, complete with a remote control -

GenusModu
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Beautiful and interesting hybrid design by Member *sduck which employs bus boards with tin plated copper bus bars and linear power supplies.

The wonder that is ~modular synths~ ... so flexible in it's overall design that it allows for combining various pieces of tech in such ways as to satisfy the needs and wants of many folks.


sduck wrote:
So instead of having my euro stuff spread out over 2 mantis cases and a variety of other things, now I have this thing -



I literally just finished it a few minutes ago, so no modules in it yet.

A close up of the power section -



And to give it some mojo, even though these will never be seen -



Oh, and it has some extra bonus bling just for fun (the power for this is well outside of the case) - rgb leds, complete with a remote control -



That is what I’d call a “Buchla Slope” cabinet like the one Subotnick used. I love it!

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
Leverkusen wrote:
I am about to build a new case for my system and wonder if my plans regarding power upgrade with LIBB's makes any sense.

Currently I have two small cases (both 208 HP), one with a Make Noise switched PSU, one with a linear Doepfer PSU2.

I plan to build a studio case now (680 HP, 64 modules +400 mA, -2000mA) powered by the PSU2 and a bigger linear Bel PSU I have here. Of course I will need more bus boards now and want to try the LIBB's. The goal to have them in a linear power system would be to prevent inter module influences. Though my plan is to also reuse the two Doepfer bus boards.

Now my question is if this makes any sense or if different bus boards in one system would rather introduce more problems as they probably are different in impedance?

One thought I had was to at least use one type of bus board with one PSU. Of course both PSU's would share a common 0V.


Hi Leverkusen,

Some clarification here, inter module noise is not improved by linear power supplies. That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards.

Linear PSUs are known for lower generated noise and ripple levels, normally under 5mVpp, whereas common switching PSUs including most euro PSUs will have 50-150 mVpp of noise, much of that in high and ultra audio frequencies.

If you must reuse the Doepfer bus boards, keep them with the Doepfer PSU2 and put as many noise maker modules on those bus boards: sequencers, modules with blinking LEDs, LFOs, VCOs, anything that generates voltages rather than processing it.

Then for the Bel PSU and LIBBs put your audio processing modules: DSP, VCFs, Mixers, VCAs, Ring Modulators, Waveshapers, preamps and so forth.

I would avoid mixing the bus boards in the same system. If the Doepfer bus boards are still too noisy you can replace them further down the road.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Leverkusen
GenusModu wrote:
Leverkusen wrote:
I am about to build a new case for my system and wonder if my plans regarding power upgrade with LIBB's makes any sense.

Currently I have two small cases (both 208 HP), one with a Make Noise switched PSU, one with a linear Doepfer PSU2.

I plan to build a studio case now (680 HP, 64 modules +400 mA, -2000mA) powered by the PSU2 and a bigger linear Bel PSU I have here. Of course I will need more bus boards now and want to try the LIBB's. The goal to have them in a linear power system would be to prevent inter module influences. Though my plan is to also reuse the two Doepfer bus boards.

Now my question is if this makes any sense or if different bus boards in one system would rather introduce more problems as they probably are different in impedance?

One thought I had was to at least use one type of bus board with one PSU. Of course both PSU's would share a common 0V.


Hi Leverkusen,

Some clarification here, inter module noise is not improved by linear power supplies. That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards.

Linear PSUs are known for lower generated noise and ripple levels, normally under 5mVpp, whereas common switching PSUs including most euro PSUs will have 50-150 mVpp of noise, much of that in high and ultra audio frequencies.

If you must reuse the Doepfer bus boards, keep them with the Doepfer PSU2 and put as many noise maker modules on those bus boards: sequencers, modules with blinking LEDs, LFOs, VCOs, anything that generates voltages rather than processing it.

Then for the Bel PSU and LIBBs put your audio processing modules: DSP, VCFs, Mixers, VCAs, Ring Modulators, Waveshapers, preamps and so forth.

I would avoid mixing the bus boards in the same system. If the Doepfer bus boards are still too noisy you can replace them further down the road.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Hi John,

Thank you for answering my request - much appreciated!

I might have worded my situation unclear though; I don't expect a linear PSU to reduce inter module noise. I explicitly want to try out the LIBB to achieve this, even if they have been designed mainly to reduce switching ripple noise.

I use linear PSU's because I had issues with switched ones and some modules again and again.

Would you explain why you recommend to put the probably noisier modules on the less protecting bus boards. I am happy to learn something and also hope to make a better decision what to place where.

Thank you for the support,

Sven
Mungo
Leverkusen wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
Leverkusen wrote:
I am about to build a new case for my system and wonder if my plans regarding power upgrade with LIBB's makes any sense.

Currently I have two small cases (both 208 HP), one with a Make Noise switched PSU, one with a linear Doepfer PSU2.

I plan to build a studio case now (680 HP, 64 modules +400 mA, -2000mA) powered by the PSU2 and a bigger linear Bel PSU I have here. Of course I will need more bus boards now and want to try the LIBB's. The goal to have them in a linear power system would be to prevent inter module influences. Though my plan is to also reuse the two Doepfer bus boards.

Now my question is if this makes any sense or if different bus boards in one system would rather introduce more problems as they probably are different in impedance?

One thought I had was to at least use one type of bus board with one PSU. Of course both PSU's would share a common 0V.


Hi Leverkusen,

Some clarification here, inter module noise is not improved by linear power supplies. That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards.

Linear PSUs are known for lower generated noise and ripple levels, normally under 5mVpp, whereas common switching PSUs including most euro PSUs will have 50-150 mVpp of noise, much of that in high and ultra audio frequencies.

If you must reuse the Doepfer bus boards, keep them with the Doepfer PSU2 and put as many noise maker modules on those bus boards: sequencers, modules with blinking LEDs, LFOs, VCOs, anything that generates voltages rather than processing it.

Then for the Bel PSU and LIBBs put your audio processing modules: DSP, VCFs, Mixers, VCAs, Ring Modulators, Waveshapers, preamps and so forth.

I would avoid mixing the bus boards in the same system. If the Doepfer bus boards are still too noisy you can replace them further down the road.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Hi John,

Thank you for answering my request - much appreciated!

I might have worded my situation unclear though; I don't expect a linear PSU to reduce inter module noise. I explicitly want to try out the LIBB to achieve this, even if they have been designed mainly to reduce switching ripple noise.

I use linear PSU's because I had issues with switched ones and some modules again and again.

Would you explain why you recommend to put the probably noisier modules on the less protecting bus boards. I am happy to learn something and also hope to make a better decision what to place where.

Thank you for the support,

Sven

Hello,
be careful with this advice. It seems that the Genumodu marketing is moving back to saying things that are untrue to try and make their product sound like it is solution and nothing else matters. Power supplies are the majority of the effect to power supply impedance (half of the crosstalk problem) in the audible range.

I have measured their claims and know they are untrue:

The purple line is what happens when you connect a poor power supply to a heavy plane bus board like the LIBB, it makes some good improvement from the original orange performance but cannot magically fix a poor power supply. Just changing to a good power supply (even keeping "normal" bus boards) is almost always better than a bad supply and perfect boards.

We all agree that distribution cabling is usually the weak link in cases, when people add the LIBB boards they improve the distribution cabling too but think (and are told) the improvement was from the LIBB boards. All the people reporting huge improvements by installing their LIBBs also changed either the distribution cabling, and/or the power supply. You can get enough improvement in most cases by just improving the wiring, especially with the Doepfer PSU/bus board combination.
GenusModu
Leverkusen wrote:

Hi John,

Thank you for answering my request - much appreciated!

I might have worded my situation unclear though; I don't expect a linear PSU to reduce inter module noise. I explicitly want to try out the LIBB to achieve this, even if they have been designed mainly to reduce switching ripple noise.

I use linear PSU's because I had issues with switched ones and some modules again and again.

Would you explain why you recommend to put the probably noisier modules on the less protecting bus boards. I am happy to learn something and also hope to make a better decision what to place where.

Thank you for the support,

Sven


Sven,

LIBB was not designed to mainly reduce switching noise. First and foremost the goal was to reduce audio frequency coupled noise through use of heavy copper ground and power planes. Once I had that, I realized that I could effectively build a distributed capacitance scheme that had ultra low resistance from any power connector on the board, and filter into the MegaHertz range with MLCC caps placed throughout the board.

The concept of segmenting noisier modules on their own power segments can be compared to the use of Auditory Masking in MP3 compression. For instance, if your VCO puts out 10 Volt peak to peak sine waves, you will never hear a few millivolts of noise riding on top of the sine wave. It is effectively masked by the higher volume signal. Now consider a few millivolts of noise on a VCA output. At max envelope output, you will not hear the noise either. Only when the envelope and VCA approach or reach zero will the low level noise cut through the masking, higher level signals. So now, when you want silence, you will hear the noise. That is what most folks with noise issues are trying to avoid.

Now the noise can also ride on top of sequencer note control voltages or other CVs. In general the noise impact on VCO tuning will be less noticeable. If not, well then you definitely need an improved power solution such as LIBB everywhere.

I am always happy to provide feedback and support.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:


Hi Leverkusen,

Some clarification here, inter module noise is not improved by linear power supplies. That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards.

Linear PSUs are known for lower generated noise and ripple levels, normally under 5mVpp, whereas common switching PSUs including most euro PSUs will have 50-150 mVpp of noise, much of that in high and ultra audio frequencies.

If you must reuse the Doepfer bus boards, keep them with the Doepfer PSU2 and put as many noise maker modules on those bus boards: sequencers, modules with blinking LEDs, LFOs, VCOs, anything that generates voltages rather than processing it.

Then for the Bel PSU and LIBBs put your audio processing modules: DSP, VCFs, Mixers, VCAs, Ring Modulators, Waveshapers, preamps and so forth.

I would avoid mixing the bus boards in the same system. If the Doepfer bus boards are still too noisy you can replace them further down the road.

John Loffink
Genus Modu


Hello,
be careful with this advice. It seems that the Genumodu marketing is moving back to saying things that are untrue to try and make their product sound like it is solution and nothing else matters. Power supplies are the majority of the effect to power supply impedance (half of the crosstalk problem) in the audible range.

I have measured their claims and know they are untrue:

The purple line is what happens when you connect a poor power supply to a heavy plane bus board like the LIBB, it makes some good improvement from the original orange performance but cannot magically fix a poor power supply. Just changing to a good power supply (even keeping "normal" bus boards) is almost always better than a bad supply and perfect boards.

We all agree that distribution cabling is usually the weak link in cases, when people add the LIBB boards they improve the distribution cabling too but think (and are told) the improvement was from the LIBB boards. All the people reporting huge improvements by installing their LIBBs also changed either the distribution cabling, and/or the power supply. You can get enough improvement in most cases by just improving the wiring, especially with the Doepfer PSU/bus board combination.


John/Mungo,

The quote you highlighted "intermodule noise is not improved by linear power supplies" was directed in comparison to switched power supplies, which seemed implied by the original poster, though this turned out to be incorrect. The second part of the highlight, "That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards" implies that the remaining distribution in the power supply is also a factor. So in that sense we partially agree and I feel you are reading way too much into the description.

Power supply impedance is not a parameter that can be controlled or determined by the user. I cannot recall every seeing an output impedance spec for a power supply. The information is not available to the consumer. So no one cannot compare Linear Power Supply A to Linear Power Supply B without $2K+ active probes, differential amplifiers or $8K+ VNAs and measuring the impedance, as you have done, or doing a fuller noise comparison.

Can you identify the "good" linear power supply (blue and green lines) and "bad" linear PSU (orange and purple lines) used for your tests? That would be useful to know. Are you saying these are power supplies from the Genus Modu recommended list?

The assumption that most customers swap out power supplies and distribution and achieve their results from them is incorrect. The massive system posted by Neil Parfitt used the same Acopian power supplies and similar bus bars between his old solution and the new one with LIBBs. Neil experienced great results, as he posted here. Others are using their current power supplies and only swapping out wires and bus boards. You are correct that some improvement is from the wiring, that is why LIBB provides 2-4 locations for 12 AWG wire. Many passive bus boards can only support 16-18 AWG distribution wire, limiting their effectiveness.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
Rex Coil 7
Todai wrote:
Interesting. Again, I know little about it - but keeping resistance as low as possible seems to be the goal?

I've crimped one ribbon cable so far. Didn't look like any bigger gauge would fit. Are these different connectors than the ones we're used to?

Edit: by the looks they obviously are. I'll see if I can source those.

Recommended AWG? Surely not 12? woah
Those types of header connectors will accept up to 20ga wire ... HOWEVER ... the wire needs to be Teflon insulated fiberglass reinforced 19 strand 20ga. Fiberglass reinforced Teflon insulation is thinner than PVC or vinyl insulation (yet still plenty insulative). 19 strand wire makes for a smaller overall outer diameter since the strands can be bundled tighter with less air gaps between the strands. Military aircraft use fiberglass reinforced Teflon insulated 19 strand wire ... why? ... because when you're talking about trunk lines that may have up to 40 or 50 individual wires, making the wires themselves with the smallest overall OD makes the trunk line smaller. When you're trying to engineer an airframe with limited space available for things like multi-wire trunk lines, every cubic inch matters.

The smaller outer diameter of Teflon insulated 19 strand wire allows you to use 20ga wire when making your own module power cables. The smaller diameter will fit inside of the holes of the plastic headers. 19 strand 20ga wire is the absolute outer edge of what will fit inside of the pins. So using that type of wire allows you to use the largest possible gauge, while still fitting the insulation inside of the plastic multi-pin connector and fitting the strands inside of the pins themselves.

One thing you need to know about fiberglass reinforced Teflon insulation, it can be pretty difficult to strip cleanly unless you have a wire stripper that is SHARP. You may need to modify the wire stripper slightly to produce clean strips as well. Most wire strippers have a "stop" that prevents the jaws of the strippers from closing too far. I've found that filing off small amounts of steel from the "stops" allowed me to tailor the strippers to work excellently with 20ga fiberglass reinforced Tefzel (aka "Teflon") insulated 19 strand Milspec aircraft grade wire.

I use that type of wire all over my project synth. It can be purchased from aircraft supply houses. I usually pay about $9.00 per 100ft roll of 20 ga fiberglass reinforced Tefzel insulated 19 strand Milspec aircraft grade wire. Comes out to $0.09 cents per foot, and comes in about ten different colors.









Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
John/Mungo,

The quote you highlighted "intermodule noise is not improved by linear power supplies" was directed in comparison to switched power supplies, which seemed implied by the original poster, though this turned out to be incorrect. The second part of the highlight, "That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards" implies that the remaining distribution in the power supply is also a factor. So in that sense we partially agree and I feel you are reading way too much into the description.

......

The assumption that most customers swap out power supplies and distribution and achieve their results from them is incorrect. The massive system posted by Neil Parfitt used the same Acopian power supplies and similar bus bars between his old solution and the new one with LIBBs. Neil experienced great results, as he posted here. Others are using their current power supplies and only swapping out wires and bus boards. You are correct that some improvement is from the wiring, that is why LIBB provides 2-4 locations for 12 AWG wire. Many passive bus boards can only support 16-18 AWG distribution wire, limiting their effectiveness.

John Loffink
Genus Modu

Leverkusen asked specifically about the Doepfer bus boards which have open spade connectors, easily capable of connecting to AWG 10 or 12 cable for distribution. Those bus board are well matched to normal sized systems with typical distribution impedance.

You made a clearly falsifiable claim that the power supply would not affect module crosstalk, while you promote power supply impedance so heavily it is disingenuous to ignore the power supplies contribution to this or completely misrepresent it. The power supply is one of the limiting factors in crosstalk by power rail impedance, along with distribution impedance from the wiring and bus boards. With your excellent bus boards and thicker wiring the power supply becomes the dominant factor in the audible range.

To see a difference across the audible range when changing over to lower impedance bus board such as the LIBB there would need to be already a very low impedance distribution system and power supply. The LIBB can't hide problems there. All your capacitance is only significant above the audio range 10kHz and up. This sort of message while accurate is misleading:
GenusModu wrote:
First and foremost the goal was to reduce audio frequency coupled noise through use of heavy copper ground and power planes. Once I had that, I realized that I could effectively build a distributed capacitance scheme that had ultra low resistance from any power connector on the board, and filter into the MegaHertz range with MLCC caps placed throughout the board.

You sure can filter into the Megahertz range, but its yet to be explained how that is important when you are not greatly affecting the audible range below 10kHz/5kHz/wherever you want to put the cutoff. Once the distribution impedance is reduced the power supply is the dominant factor across the audible range.


GenusModu wrote:
Power supply impedance is not a parameter that can be controlled or determined by the user. I cannot recall every seeing an output impedance spec for a power supply. The information is not available to the consumer. So no one cannot compare Linear Power Supply A to Linear Power Supply B without $2K+ active probes, differential amplifiers or $8K+ VNAs and measuring the impedance, as you have done, or doing a fuller noise comparison.

Can you identify the "good" linear power supply (blue and green lines) and "bad" linear PSU (orange and purple lines) used for your tests? That would be useful to know. Are you saying these are power supplies from the Genus Modu recommended list?

There are very few power supplies that specify their output impedance, I have a few on hand for lab use (one with a full frequency range typical specification, more common with limits at a few specific frequencies) but they are not really appropriate or cost effective for a modular rack. If you want to stand behind your simulated impedance results then you'll need to point to the power supplies that can produce that sort of performance, and if there aren't any with the specifications measure it yourself.

I sell a eurorack power supply and recommend the use of LIBB units to expand it, while it has a typical measured impedance thats not a guaranteed specification and only informative. I have suggested to you cost effective ways to measure these parameters or create a standardised test that users could compare.

Trying to make simple binary separations between linear and switching supplies is fundamentally marketing at work. You can find linear supplies with poor output impedance control and noise, and switching supplies with excellent output impedance and noise. If you just pick random supplies without testing them then the situation is likely to be reversed, but clinging to linear supplies as inherently superior is simply false.

What explains much of the improvements in noise floor is not power rail impedance but reduced 0V fluctuations through reduced 0V distribution impedance. Again the distribution wiring is the majority of the contribution and a well planned 0V block/rail along with some thicker 0V wires is usually the place to start, making more of a difference than the choice of bus board.

There are power supplies and bus boards with such low impedances that the wiring will always dominate the result. You've spent a lot of time and effort to end up with a product in that category, engineered right to the edge of practical performance and limited in the audible range by everything around it. Sell it on the actual value, not all the misleading marketing puff you continue to push out.
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:
The concept of segmenting noisier modules on their own power segments can be compared to the use of Auditory Masking in MP3 compression. For instance, if your VCO puts out 10 Volt peak to peak sine waves, you will never hear a few millivolts of noise riding on top of the sine wave. It is effectively masked by the higher volume signal. Now consider a few millivolts of noise on a VCA output. At max envelope output, you will not hear the noise either. Only when the envelope and VCA approach or reach zero will the low level noise cut through the masking, higher level signals. So now, when you want silence, you will hear the noise. That is what most folks with noise issues are trying to avoid.

Segmenting a power system reduces crosstalk immensely, its not hiding the noise behind loud signals but taking the noise out absolutely. Your story doesn't seem to connect to segmenting power distribution or supplies at all.

If there is a noisy module which is disturbing the power rails or 0V, and that is audible in other modules sharing common paths, taking either of the modules onto a separate path will remove the noise. There are some common paths that are more difficult to separate than others but its not impossible.

Its popular to try and fix noise problems with ever lower impedance and bigger wires, bus boards, and power supplies. But there are other ways to solve it, which can be used in combination. Trying to make binary one vs the other comparisons is not helpful when people can use both and end up with a better result.
Rex Coil 7
Mungo wrote:
... It seems that the Genumodu marketing is moving back to saying things that are untrue to try and make their product sound like it is solution and nothing else matters. Power supplies are the majority of the effect to power supply impedance (half of the crosstalk problem) in the audible range.
From the Genus Modu power supply recommendation page:

LINK = http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-psus.html

GenusModu wrote:
While LIBB can significantly reduce switching power supply noise, the end solution will still be noiser than an average linear power supply.


Perhaps wording that statement slightly differently ... "While use of the LIBB (which allows for the use of large PSU-to-Busboard wiring which in turn will optimize the entire PSU to Module power distribution chain) can significantly reduce switching power supply noise, the end solution will still be noiser [sic] than an average linear power supply".

Member *Mungo, you're really beating this guy up in public. I (for one) would respect you a lot more if you took your sharpest criticisms to private messaging. You're also insulting the intelligence of LIBB buyers, automatically assuming that they cannot discern use of heavier distribution wire along with the LIBB as combined reasons for increased performance.

Lastly, since you've set precedence here, I guess if it's ok to call Member *Genus Modu a liar, then it's also ok to call you a bloated ego maniacal attention seeking narcissist.

Respect is earned, not bestowed. Behavior is a choice. Tact; discover it.

thumbs up
Leverkusen
I really appreciate the insights and the different standpoints shown by members @GenusModu and @Mungo in response to my question and about power distribution in general. That's very helpful for me and my decision process.

Also I appreciate the willingness to openly discuss ones product in public. That's showing a great spirit.

I don't see any use though in breezing in and insulting someone. I am very happy that this thread has become more civic and would prefer if it stays like that and we can stay on topic instead of unnecessarily getting personal.

Chugging Beers
Mungo
Leverkusen wrote:
I really appreciate the insights and the different standpoints shown by members @GenusModu and @Mungo in response to my question and about power distribution in general. That's very helpful for me and my decision process.
Not a problem, if you are getting heavy wire to connect the LIBB boards to the power supply it is a good opportunity to improve the wiring on the Doepfer boards at the same time.

Your still unanswered question is a good one:
Leverkusen wrote:
Now my question is if this makes any sense or if different bus boards in one system would rather introduce more problems as they probably are different in impedance?
Having a mixture of bus boards won't introduce new problems. If you started with all Doepfer boards and swapped out some improved boards such as LIBBs one at a time, it would only improve with each one.

Leverkusen wrote:
Would you explain why you recommend to put the probably noisier modules on the less protecting bus boards. I am happy to learn something and also hope to make a better decision what to place where.
The higher impedance bus boards introduce more crosstalk between modules, so the general thinking is to put the most sensitive modules in the lowest impedance place, and then put modules which will introduce noise somewhere else with as few common paths as possible.

It strongly depends how everything is wired together, using a bus type connection going from one board to the next, or using a star type connection all coming from a single point (creating more isolation). The result also changes if you are trying to reduce noise at a single module instead of across all modules.

On a bus type connection you get lowest noise overall when the noise creating modules are closest to the power supply (at the lower impedance position!) this sort of non intuitive result is very confusing and the opposite of what most people would think is the correct answer. The module with the lowest noise is closest to the power supply so the logical answer is to put the most noise critical module there, but that will increase the noise in all the other modules!

There was a great thread looking at the detail of where the wiring connects in the DIY forum:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=211316&highlight=
That sets up a case with each board having its own path back to a star 0V point and star power paths for improved crosstalk reduction. With a star arrangement noise creating modules mostly affect the modules on the same bus board, so you can group all the noise sensitive modules on their own bus board to keep them quiet. With a mixture of different bus board impedances (and/or different distribution impedances from different wire lengths) you have the same choice to reduce noise overall (noise producers connected to lowest impedances), or prioritise reducing noise on some specific modules (sensitive modules at lowest impedance).

As always, the answer is complicated and changes depending on your specific priorities and choices.
Joe.
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Member *Mungo, you're really beating this guy up in public. I (for one) would respect you a lot more if you took your sharpest criticisms to private messaging. You're also insulting the intelligence of LIBB buyers, automatically assuming that they cannot discern use of heavier distribution wire along with the LIBB as combined reasons for increased performance.

Lastly, since you've set precedence here, I guess if it's ok to call Member *Genus Modu a liar, then it's also ok to call you a bloated ego maniacal attention seeking narcissist.


I've already pointed out the extreme hyperbole in the marketing earlier in this thread, the legal implications it would have if LIBB were to be sold in Australia without modifying their claims. The claims were modified, because they were not the truth, and there continues to be claims made here without supporting evidence.

Your recent political posting, along with this clear bullying/intimidation of qualified people positing their valid criticisms, means you're rapidly reaching a point you won't be coming back from.

Something to consider before your next post mate.
meatbeatz
paults wrote:
The LIBB is specifically designed to filter noise from switching power supplies like the PSU3.

GenusModu wrote:
LIBB was not designed to mainly reduce switching noise.

Pokeout
GenusModu
Joe. wrote:
Rex Coil 7 wrote:
Member *Mungo, you're really beating this guy up in public. I (for one) would respect you a lot more if you took your sharpest criticisms to private messaging. You're also insulting the intelligence of LIBB buyers, automatically assuming that they cannot discern use of heavier distribution wire along with the LIBB as combined reasons for increased performance.

Lastly, since you've set precedence here, I guess if it's ok to call Member *Genus Modu a liar, then it's also ok to call you a bloated ego maniacal attention seeking narcissist.


I've already pointed out the extreme hyperbole in the marketing earlier in this thread, the legal implications it would have if LIBB were to be sold in Australia without modifying their claims. The claims were modified, because they were not the truth, and there continues to be claims made here without supporting evidence.

Your recent political posting, along with this clear bullying/intimidation of qualified people positing their valid criticisms, means you're rapidly reaching a point you won't be coming back from.

Something to consider before your next post mate.


Here is the single change to the LIBB web page in terms of marketing, and my response to that from Apr. 9 2018:

Genus Modu wrote:
The Genus Modu web site states "Quietest Eurorack passive bus board you can buy." I thought the "passive" part was obvious, but recently added the qualifier to be technically correct.


John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
meatbeatz wrote:
paults wrote:
The LIBB is specifically designed to filter noise from switching power supplies like the PSU3.

GenusModu wrote:
LIBB was not designed to mainly reduce switching noise.

Pokeout


meatbeatz,

I believe you are addressing semantics, between two different people on top of that. The two aspects are not mutually exclusive. LIBB can do both. I started with the low resistance board and bulk caps on the first LIBB prototype. The MLCC caps to address switching noise, both from switching PSUs and switching regulators on modules, were added in the second revision, after consulting with Lars Larsen on a good range to support for video synthesis.

I did want to be clear for the recent poster that LIBB is effective for users of linear PSUs, not just switchers.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
GenusModu
John/Mungo:

Mungo wrote:
You made a clearly falsifiable claim that the power supply would not affect module crosstalk,

Incorrect, I never said that.

Mungo you are interpreting things very poorly and arguing against statements I have not made. That is not productive.

Mungo wrote:
…while you promote power supply impedance so heavily it is disingenuous to ignore the power supplies contribution to this or completely misrepresent it.

If I ignore the power supply impedance contribution it is because it is something that the consumer can do nothing about, since that information is not available as you agreed to below.

Mungo wrote:
The power supply is one of the limiting factors in crosstalk by power rail impedance, along with distribution impedance from the wiring and bus boards. With your excellent bus boards and thicker wiring the power supply becomes the dominant factor in the audible range.

It might surprise you that I almost agree with this statement, but I would change “power supply becomes…” to “power supply could become the dominant factor.” But just to be clear, I would apply that to a LIBB/heavy wire gauge system, not to some of the common euro power distribution cables and 1 ounce boards with ~20 milliohms of ground resistance and ~70 milliohms of power line resistance.

Mungo wrote:
To see a difference across the audible range when changing over to lower impedance bus board such as the LIBB there would need to be already a very low impedance distribution system and power supply. The LIBB can't hide problems there. All your capacitance is only significant above the audio range 10kHz and up. This sort of message while accurate is misleading:
GenusModu wrote:
First and foremost the goal was to reduce audio frequency coupled noise through use of heavy copper ground and power planes. Once I had that, I realized that I could effectively build a distributed capacitance scheme that had ultra low resistance from any power connector on the board, and filter into the MegaHertz range with MLCC caps placed throughout the board.

You sure can filter into the Megahertz range, but its yet to be explained how that is important when you are not greatly affecting the audible range below 10kHz/5kHz/wherever you want to put the cutoff. Once the distribution impedance is reduced the power supply is the dominant factor across the audible range.

This has been discussed before several times, look up PN Junction Rectification, Video Synthesis and the examples in the white paper. The goal of high frequency filtering was developed with feedback from Lars Larsen of LZX systems to support improved video synthesis results to 6 MHz and better.

Mungo wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
Power supply impedance is not a parameter that can be controlled or determined by the user. I cannot recall every seeing an output impedance spec for a power supply. The information is not available to the consumer. So no one cannot compare Linear Power Supply A to Linear Power Supply B without $2K+ active probes, differential amplifiers or $8K+ VNAs and measuring the impedance, as you have done, or doing a fuller noise comparison.

Can you identify the "good" linear power supply (blue and green lines) and "bad" linear PSU (orange and purple lines) used for your tests? That would be useful to know. Are you saying these are power supplies from the Genus Modu recommended list?


There are very few power supplies that specify their output impedance, I have a few on hand for lab use (one with a full frequency range typical specification, more common with limits at a few specific frequencies) but they are not really appropriate or cost effective for a modular rack. If you want to stand behind your simulated impedance results then you'll need to point to the power supplies that can produce that sort of performance, and if there aren't any with the specifications measure it yourself.

It is a very slippery slope for me to create my own specifications for other commercially released products. The designs can change at any time, and there can be previous versions that I know nothing about, so the parameters I test or publish could easily be different for the same models. What I was curious about was whether you saw those variations for recommended power supplies. It seems that the answer is no and it was a theoretical argument.

Mungo wrote:
Trying to make simple binary separations between linear and switching supplies is fundamentally marketing at work. You can find linear supplies with poor output impedance control and noise, and switching supplies with excellent output impedance and noise. If you just pick random supplies without testing them then the situation is likely to be reversed, but clinging to linear supplies as inherently superior is simply false.

One of the two points you are trying to argue against is one I have never made. I have never said that linear power supplies have better impedance control than switching supplies. Impedance control depends on every individual PSU design, not linear or switching design, in that sense we agree.

I have generalized in terms of noise output because most linear PSUs have less noise than switching PSUs. I have one make of switching PSU on the list, so they are not completely ignored. I will list more if I find any. Just about any linear PSU with specs will make the list.

Mungo wrote:
What explains much of the improvements in noise floor is not power rail impedance but reduced 0V fluctuations through reduced 0V distribution impedance. Again the distribution wiring is the majority of the contribution and a well planned 0V block/rail along with some thicker 0V wires is usually the place to start, making more of a difference than the choice of bus board.

I do not agree the wires make more difference than the bus board in the most common cases which are 1 ounce bus boards.

Here are the three bus board plus wire ground resistance examples from the Eurorack Power Distribution and Noise White Paper http://www.genusmodu.com/products/libb-wp-01.html.

1 ounce bus board plus 10 inches of 3x16 AWG ground = 17.04 mohm BB + 1.02 mohm wire
4 ounce bus board plus 12 inches of 12 AWG ground = 2.02 mohm BB + 1.45 mohm wire
LIBB plus 10 inches of 10 inches of 2x12 AWG ground = 0.69 mohm BB + 0.61 mohm wire

LIBB and the 4 ounce bus board are nearly balanced between bus board and wire resistances, while the 1 ounce board is unbalanced with most of the resistance on the bus board. Replacing the 1 ounce bus board, not the wire, is the priority for noise reduction.

Now if you had the 4 ounce board with single 16 or 18 AWG ground wires, then sure the priority is reversed and replace the wires first. That is a less common scenario but it can happen.

If you have the 4 ounce bus board with 12 AWG wire, then the power supply can be the next improvement point. That is a specific case, not a general case.

Mungo wrote:
There are power supplies and bus boards with such low impedances that the wiring will always dominate the result. You've spent a lot of time and effort to end up with a product in that category, engineered right to the edge of practical performance and limited in the audible range by everything around it. Sell it on the actual value, not all the misleading marketing puff you continue to push out.

That was sounding great until the last bit…

John Loffink
Genus Modu
meatbeatz
GenusModu wrote:
I believe you are addressing semantics.

The two aspects are not mutually exclusive. LIBB can do both. I started with the low resistance board and bulk caps on the first LIBB prototype. The MLCC caps to address switching noise, both from switching PSUs and switching regulators on modules, were added in the second revision


That's right, semantics. Just like the "Quietest Eurorack bus board you can buy" forgetting a whole class of busboard as if that was no big thing and when it was pointed out your business partner threw a 20 page wobbly. This is where it all started and you both continue to make out as if this wasn't a case of puffy marketing and that you've both been transparent throughout. This is why you are being scrutinised. Paul can't understand why Make Noise isn't scrutinised to this degree. Let me spell it out for you. Because they aren't talking shit, and making conveniently vague claims while lecturing us on how great they are and how the rest of us know nothing. I will add that using passive distro on such large systems is not "how it's done", it's an arguably clunky way it can be done necessitating ridiculously large cable runs and busbars when you could've used an active solution. I'll check back in another 6 months to see if you are still persisting in making out as if you've not been sneaky with your wording and if so I'll repeat it over for you.
Mungo
GenusModu wrote:

Some clarification here, inter module noise is not improved by linear power supplies. That is a function of the power distribution, primarily wires and bus boards.

Linear PSUs are known for lower generated noise and ripple levels, normally under 5mVpp, whereas common switching PSUs including most euro PSUs will have 50-150 mVpp of noise, much of that in high and ultra audio frequencies.

Here is the blurring of lines between generalisations and absolute statements. You can't put those sentences right next to each other and pretend like you haven't made a statement on power supply impedance. Like output noise different supplies have a range of difference characteristics.

GenusModu wrote:

LIBB provides 2-4 locations for 12 AWG wire. Many passive bus boards can only support 16-18 AWG distribution wire, limiting their effectiveness.

GenusModu wrote:

1 ounce bus board plus 10 inches of 3x16 AWG ground = 17.04 mohm BB + 1.02 mohm wire
4 ounce bus board plus 12 inches of 12 AWG ground = 2.02 mohm BB + 1.45 mohm wire
LIBB plus 10 inches of 10 inches of 2x12 AWG ground = 0.69 mohm BB + 0.61 mohm wire

LIBB and the 4 ounce bus board are nearly balanced between bus board and wire resistances, while the 1 ounce board is unbalanced with most of the resistance on the bus board. Replacing the 1 ounce bus board, not the wire, is the priority for noise reduction.

Now if you had the 4 ounce board with single 16 or 18 AWG ground wires, then sure the priority is reversed and replace the wires first. That is a less common scenario but it can happen.

Three 16 AWG cables in parallel is not typical, look though all the examples posted on this site or the cases shipped from manufacturers. A single 18 AWG cable is the norm and matches well to typical bus boards. When the majority of the noise improvement is from better control of the 0V connections (not the much discussed here power supply impedances) it is comparing 6-10mOhm of 18 AWG wire and connections with a similar 10 mOhm or less of busboard 0V resistance.

12" lengths only apply to the ideally placed bus boards or small cases, once the cases exceed 3 rows and/or 120HP they are typically going to be longer, or using multiple power supplies and the inherent isolation that provides.

GenusModu wrote:

If you have the 4 ounce bus board with 12 AWG wire, then the power supply can be the next improvement point. That is a specific case, not a general case.

That benchmark would also include anything lower impedance such as your boards with their recommended wiring. Thats the point, systems are approaching and passing to the level where they are limited by the power supply impedance and changes to it will make the most difference. Low impedance systems are the specific case under discussion, not some arbitrary straw man to create an argument.

GenusModu wrote:
What I was curious about was whether you saw those variations for recommended power supplies. It seems that the answer is no and it was a theoretical argument.

Once agin the deceptive language. I have measured a range of power supplies and know the impedance characteristics of them, there is nothing theoretical about that. If you aren't presenting the output impedances of the power supplies you recommend (they don't have to become specifications as I have shown) then you are the one who remains theoretical, relying on models/assumptions/simulations.

The gains from improving the power supply impedance are almost always minor compared to the improvements of the 0V distribution. Your product and recommendations help make that happen but you focus all the marketing on your products unique aspects (lower supply impedance and capacitance) which are either minor effects or happening at frequencies outside the audible range. Its understandable and straight from a marketing playbook. There is a lot of good information and advice common to all power systems, the LIBB makes it easier and is a leading example of a bus board. But being such low impedance the wiring and power supply are critical to getting the most out of it.
Leverkusen
Mungo wrote:
Having a mixture of bus boards won't introduce new problems. If you started with all Doepfer boards and swapped out some improved boards such as LIBBs one at a time, it would only improve with each one.


Thank you @Mungo for confirming this - it’s great to know that a step by step transition is possible. Also by improving the wiring. This will be the way to go for me.

Mungo wrote:

The higher impedance bus boards introduce more crosstalk between modules, so the general thinking is to put the most sensitive modules in the lowest impedance place, and then put modules which will introduce noise somewhere else with as few common paths as possible.

It strongly depends how everything is wired together, using a bus type connection going from one board to the next, or using a star type connection all coming from a single point (creating more isolation). The result also changes if you are trying to reduce noise at a single module instead of across all modules.

On a bus type connection you get lowest noise overall when the noise creating modules are closest to the power supply (at the lower impedance position!) this sort of non intuitive result is very confusing and the opposite of what most people would think is the correct answer. The module with the lowest noise is closest to the power supply so the logical answer is to put the most noise critical module there, but that will increase the noise in all the other modules!

There was a great thread looking at the detail of where the wiring connects in the DIY forum:
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=211316&highlight=
That sets up a case with each board having its own path back to a star 0V point and star power paths for improved crosstalk reduction. With a star arrangement noise creating modules mostly affect the modules on the same bus board, so you can group all the noise sensitive modules on their own bus board to keep them quiet. With a mixture of different bus board impedances (and/or different distribution impedances from different wire lengths) you have the same choice to reduce noise overall (noise producers connected to lowest impedances), or prioritise reducing noise on some specific modules (sensitive modules at lowest impedance).

As always, the answer is complicated and changes depending on your specific priorities and choices.


I think that wraps it up for me and puts me in the position to try what works best in my case while knowing what I am doing and can expect from the changes. Thanks a lot!
Also for the link to the other thread which I missed until now. I am pretty sure that I have read every single power thread on the forum but this one makes it clear by showing the diagram evolve with every learning step.
GenusModu
I am adding Acopian Gold Box Linear Single Output power supplies to the recommended list. If you buy the A Series you will get noise and ripple specification of less than 0.25 mVrms across input voltage range and temperature. That is the best ripple spec I have seen for any euro capable power supply. Current output ranges from 4 to 21 Amps for the A Series, and down to 0.5 Amps for the B Series with 1.5 mVrms ripple spec. As these are single output versions, you will need to buy two for +/-12V, wiring one as the negative voltage.

Acopian Gold Box Linear Single Output

resynthesize
does anyone have a mouser part # for appropriate faston tabs for wiring a LIBB to an L-1 PSU?
GenusModu
resynthesize wrote:
does anyone have a mouser part # for appropriate faston tabs for wiring a LIBB to an L-1 PSU?


Tabs for soldering onto the L-1 PSU are TE Connectivity part number 1217861-1, or Digi-key part number A100452CT-ND or Mouser part number 571-1217861-1.

resynthesize
GenusModu wrote:
resynthesize wrote:
does anyone have a mouser part # for appropriate faston tabs for wiring a LIBB to an L-1 PSU?


Tabs for soldering onto the L-1 PSU are TE Connectivity part number 1217861-1, or Digi-key part number A100452CT-ND or Mouser part number 571-1217861-1.



Thank you! I lol'd at minimum order qty of 10,000 from mouser. Luckily arrow has them in stock too: https://www.arrow.com/en/products/1217861-1/te-connectivity
boubak
Enter in the land of modular synths
    --> Start planning an eurorack modular
      --> Start thinking about a case
        --> Start reading about power supplies
          --> Start reading topics on MW
            --> WTF HOLY FLAME WAR TECHNICAL ARGUING SH*T STORM screaming goo yo
              --> Scary first introduction to this community, but learned several stuffs on the way.
                --> Ok found possible contenders for power supplies, distribution system, wires and etc. smile







Strange exhausting and interesting experience grin
jroman
The information I could find from the LIBB Wiring Guide suggests using 12 AWG wire from the power supply to a barrier strip, but I can't find a specific suggestion for what to use from the barrier strip to the LIBB. My instinct says you can't go wrong with 12, but maybe you would suggest otherwise?

Also, is there any difference for using solid vs stranded wire? Stranded seems more convenient for its flexibility but I figure it is worth asking.
resynthesize
Here's my installation. I'm running two DIY L-1 PSUs, each powering two LIBBs. For each PSU, I ran two wires for +12, -12, and ground to a terminal block, and then ran +12, -12, and two grounds to each LIBB. The maximum cable length is a little over 16 inches. All wire is 12 gauge. The PSUs are both wired to a single IEC inlet, but are otherwise not connected at all. Voltages are measuring +-12.00 at the IDC headers.

Before I fill my case back up with modules, any suggestions for improvement? Would it be worthwhile to run ground cables between the two terminal blocks?








[/img]
L-1
resynthesize

Don't forget about ventilation because PSU generates some heat. Make some holes to have air movement inside the case.
GenusModu
jroman wrote:
The information I could find from the LIBB Wiring Guide suggests using 12 AWG wire from the power supply to a barrier strip, but I can't find a specific suggestion for what to use from the barrier strip to the LIBB. My instinct says you can't go wrong with 12, but maybe you would suggest otherwise?

Also, is there any difference for using solid vs stranded wire? Stranded seems more convenient for its flexibility but I figure it is worth asking.


Use 12 AWG stranded wire for the the entire installation. There is no benefit for solid wire.

John
jroman
GenusModu wrote:
Use 12 AWG stranded wire for the the entire installation. There is no benefit for solid wire.

John
Great, thanks!

I was wondering if you could help me sort out the wiring topology for the eurorack power supply system I am building. The system is meant to potentially run 12U x 84HP of LZX style video modules, so I needed a high-power low-noise solution and Acopian supplies with the LIBB seemed to be the solution. I'm not quite sure what the appropriate way to hook everything up is, though.

I've created a diagram showing the components that I have. As you can see, there are 2x Acopian VA12MT400 supplies for +12V and -12V and one B5TN100 for +5V. I added in hookups from the power inlet to each of the power supplies (distributed from a WAGO 221 wire nut). But I'm unsure how to connect the Acopian supplies to the barrier strip / LIBB. In the wiring guide, the COM ports of the power supply are wired to the GROUND connectors on the LIBB. But with dual (or, in my case, triple) supplies there is no COM connector. The Acopian usage guide warns against linking the output of different supplies together:
Quote:
Do not attempt to directly parallel the outputs of two power supplies. This would result in current flowing from the higher-set output into the lower-set output, and probable damage to both circuits. Outputs may be connected in series to obtain a higher voltage provided that a reverse-biased diode, having PIV and current ratings exceeding the combined output, is used across each output; however, keep in mind that the output current to be drawn cannot exceed the output current rating of the lowest rated supply used.

And if the total current is limited by the smallest supply anyway that would kind of defeat the purpose of having two A12 supplies in the first place.

Finally, is there any way to power a fan off of these rails without generating lots of electrical noise?

[img][/img]
GenusModu
jroman wrote:
GenusModu wrote:
Use 12 AWG stranded wire for the the entire installation. There is no benefit for solid wire.

John
Great, thanks!

I was wondering if you could help me sort out the wiring topology for the eurorack power supply system I am building. The system is meant to potentially run 12U x 84HP of LZX style video modules, so I needed a high-power low-noise solution and Acopian supplies with the LIBB seemed to be the solution. I'm not quite sure what the appropriate way to hook everything up is, though.

I've created a diagram showing the components that I have. As you can see, there are 2x Acopian VA12MT400 supplies for +12V and -12V and one B5TN100 for +5V. I added in hookups from the power inlet to each of the power supplies (distributed from a WAGO 221 wire nut). But I'm unsure how to connect the Acopian supplies to the barrier strip / LIBB. In the wiring guide, the COM ports of the power supply are wired to the GROUND connectors on the LIBB. But with dual (or, in my case, triple) supplies there is no COM connector. The Acopian usage guide warns against linking the output of different supplies together:
Quote:
Do not attempt to directly parallel the outputs of two power supplies. This would result in current flowing from the higher-set output into the lower-set output, and probable damage to both circuits. Outputs may be connected in series to obtain a higher voltage provided that a reverse-biased diode, having PIV and current ratings exceeding the combined output, is used across each output; however, keep in mind that the output current to be drawn cannot exceed the output current rating of the lowest rated supply used.

And if the total current is limited by the smallest supply anyway that would kind of defeat the purpose of having two A12 supplies in the first place.

Finally, is there any way to power a fan off of these rails without generating lots of electrical noise?

[img][/img]


I will respond in more detail in the email you sent separate from this thread.

The LIBB System Wiring Guide shows a bipolar power supply with +, COM and - connections. When using floating single voltage power supplies, the terminals are labeled + and -. Wire ground to -, and the + terminal provides a positive voltage. Wire ground to +, and the - terminal provides -12V. So the two positive voltages, +12V and +5V, wire the - to the LIBB GND terminals, while the -12V supply wires + to the GND terminals. LIBB can take 4 GND wires, so that will work. When wired this way, the +/-12V supplies are effectively wired in series as in the Acopian quotes.

If you only have two bus boards you probably don't need the barrier strips.

John Loffink
Genus Modu
gruvsyco
I finally got mine all put together. 9u x 104hp. uZeus with the 3000mA Adapter. I'm marginally satisfied with the wiring I did. It might have been cleaner with the 38770-0305 instead of the 38770-0105.

Other than that, I am really pleased. The whole modular powered up with the standard PS, I put the beefier PS on anyway. My uO-C which would not power up with just under 6u x 104hp on the same PS with flying busboards fires right up. It feels good to have an almost legit modular case now. I might upgrade to a linear supply eventually.
seank
anyone here have a recommendation for housing external linear PSU's? i ordered two LIBB's to replace the tps80w boards i have in my two submodular 6u 104hp cases, but i don't have enough room for the PSU's inside the case.

i had planned to mount two L-1 PSU's in a custom enclosure and then connect them to the cases with a heavy duty 4-pin cable/connector but i'm not sure what the best option is.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Page 1 of 21
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group