It offers standard controls with total resistances of 10, 20, 50 and 100kOhm. Custom versions will be considered. The nominal attenuation at each of the 24 steps is: 0, -2, -4, -6, -8, -10, -12, -14, -16, -18, -20, -22, -24, -26, -28, -30, -32, -34, -38, -42, -46, -50, -60 and -infinite dB. Figure 1 shows the outline dimensions of the two-deck version (also see Photo 2). The front of the switch has a locating tab that fits in the notch in the mounting- panel hole. The header pins allow you to make connections by hardwire, a header socket, soldering to a circuit board, or, I suppose, a wirewrap (Photo 3). The CT1 takes up little panel space and is suited for "slim-line" enclosures that can't accommodate larger switches or potentiometers. Danish Audio ConnecT's model CT2 (not tested) is slightly more compact. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Figure1. Two-deck CT1 attenuator outlines dimensions | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The switch has a positive mechanical detent at each step. While the turning torque is light, the detents can be felt and heard. The 6mm-diameter shaft accommodates knobs with standard 0.25" shaft holes. If panel space is at a premium, you can use a relatively small-diameter knob and still turn the shaft without using excessive force.
You can find more specifications on the DACT website. My shop isn't equipped to confirm many of the electrical specifications. I checked attenuation accuracy, channel balance, frequency response, and channel separation with the outputs of a 20kOhm stereo CT1 feeding unity-gain buffers. This setup simulates the loading an attenuator might see in real life. The CT1 was mounted in an aluminum box with its inputs connected to the input jacks via shielded cable. The attenuator outputs were connected to the inputs of a pair of Borbely tape buffers1 by short, unshielded wires. The buffers isolate the attenuator from the loading effects of cables and test equipment and have a 1MOhm input resistance. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Measurements For further information on attenuation, channel balance, and frequency-response errors, refer to http://www.dact.com. At the specified level of attenuation accuracy, the loading of a 1MOhm resistor on a 20kOhm control is significant. Therefore, I compensated attenuation measurements for the buffer input resistance. Most of the attenuation errors at 1kHz were well within the ±0.05dB limit, specified at DC. Those that exceeded the limit I attribute to measurement error rather than a deficiency in the CT1. In any case, the audible result of attenuation error is an incorrect setting of the system output level. Step size and finite loading of the attenuator are likely to dominate the ability to establish the desired level, rather than the insignificant errors indicated by the measurements. The channel balance (tracking between the two decks) was well within the specified ±0.05dB at frequencies up to 50kHz. You should not experience any "image wander" when the control position is changed. The frequency-response errors at 10, 20, 50, and 100kHz are relative to the output at 1kHz and are inconsequential throughout the audible range. The larger errors at higher frequencies and high attenuation definitely result from the 8050A's measurement limitations rather than any deficiencies in the CT1. Figure 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Listening Tests Natural Sounds A CD by the BBC Singers (BBC MM125) revealed some interesting contrasts. In Bach's Der Geist Hilft (BWV 226), the singers were clearer, and the continuo organ more distinct and rhythmic with the CT1. This cut has a lot of what I call "splatter echo", and I surmise the recording venue, St. Paul's Church, Knightsbridge, London, has hard surfaces. Anyway, the "splatters" were more distinct with the CT1 and more in keeping with my experience in similar acoustics. In a piece by Max Reger, the CT1's sound was less dark and more natural. In the loud parts, the chorus sounded more intense and involved than with the "passive preamp”. In some songs by Mendelssohn, the micro dynamics were more evident and the choir less bound to the speakers when the CT1 was used. In a recording of our church choir with organ and string orchestra, more individual singers were recognizable and there was better separation of voices and instruments through the CT1. I could go on but, you get the picture - the CT1 was simply clearer than the "passive preamp". This wasn't accomplished by the addition of artificial detail. The components of the sound were better integrated and closer to life. In comparison, the "passive preamp" interjected a slight brownish haze that obscured detail. By the way, when the buffers were added to the equation, the sound was excessively bright and unattractive. It reemphasized the reasons I haven't had a line stage in my main system for 25 years. This review was initially published on Audio Electronics, Issue 1, 2000, p.p. 42-45, of Audio Electronics magazine. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We appreciate the care that Mr. Gloeckler has taken when considering the measurements and their validity. The CT1 matches most testequipment on many parameters, and it is of course important to evaluate the measurements' validity. Well done! We have also concluded, like Mr. Gloeckler, that the sonic performance of a high-quality passive volume control is often better than most active preamplifiers. This may not come as a surprise, since all components add their own signatures to the sound, and only the finest preamplifiers are nearly "inaudible." On the other hand, connecting, for example, a CD player directly to the power amplifier with only a passive volume control in between has its own limitations. Some important impedance issues need to be considered. At our web site there is an application note describing this topic. Both passive and active preamplifiers require a high-quality volume control and we are satisfied that Mr. Gloeckler's listening tests document that there are significant audible differences between standard volume controls and the more specialized controls. ln his review, Fred Gloeckler caIls for a high-resolution balance control. We will not disappoint him. We are now working on a stepped balance control with very high resolution. Allan Isaksen
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Information originally from http://www.dact.com with permission | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For Further information http://www.dact.com | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||