|
Home
/ FAQ
/ News Classifieds / Events |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer |
Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
68.247.57.38
I have gotten perhaps too lazy for DIY. I have been very busy with business and a new absolute stunner of another business may be upon me.
What is a good non-vintage new or good used manufactured preamp/power amp combo toy of at least 4-watts out for say up to $3K? The reason I post here is I know DIYers are experienced hearing the better equipment.
We do generally agree, that 45 based tube gear is amazingly good. However the number of speakers which really do the 2Watts justice is small below $5K...So those extra two watts make a difference.
and the EML Mesh 2A3's are so good that they qualify for 45/50/10y, etc territory at the good 4W range.
You can find many good speaker choices for $2.5K or so in the 98db/1w efficiency range which will do those 4watts justice.
In general though I do agree with Tube Wrangler very much... 2-4V ooutput CD/Computer/Phono STage... (and I am working on a DC coupled 2 tube Phono stage which will do 2v-3v output at OK output impedance (3K))
Passive/ Transformer Preamp,,
Yes this will really help overall sound...
the truth is for me Computer/Squeezebox/Outboard DAC/ Passive Transformer Preamp/2-4W Amp/98db Speakers is a very good chain.
Anyway
Have Fun
-3db
You're going to get many answers on this. Some of them will be above average, some will be bad.I've been enjoying music and film for many years now, and I know many like ourselves who've been the route-- using both DIY and purchased equipment.
To me, the object is to combine long-term reliability, totally eliminate all fussiness, including any and all adjustments except for volume control and maybe that to be a remote, eliminate any and all need to replace anything for up to ten years or so, and after that TUBES ONLY, and to get musical fidelity that no DIY person or commercial manufacturer has yet accomplished. This is not meant to be bragging or exaggerating, today it is easy to accomplish.
All other amplifier parts should last for at least 100 years and WILL in the best equipment, since today we use very few capacitors and all of those are oils or Tin-Foils, etc., (no electrolytics, ever).
To me, linestage preamps are now obsolete-- we now have passive volume controls that are FAR more dynamic than any powered preamp, and the extra transparency of the passive makes all else sound like it's more musically challenged--in one way or another.
Today, your best digital sources are all capable of outputting 2-4 volts, and that makes the passive attenuator virtually perfect going into a good amplifier.
You'll want to listen to vinyl, so why not design all phono preamps to put out exactly the same 2-4 volts? To me, all other powered preamps are now obsolete, especially in overall musical performance.
Here's what has become the state of the art today, and it isn't complicated or fussy at all:
(1) Start with really good, low-power amplifiers. By that, I mean under two watts per channel. Why would I do this? There are many reasons-- all of them good. A few of these are (a) reliability and simplicity, (b) vastly superior dynamics and transparency, (c) virtually no heat problems, (d) no need to use components that are too large to completely honor all that is on a modern recording. There are other reasons.
(2) Choose speakers to match THOSE amplifiers ONLY. Eliminate all speakers that are under 98 db/watt sensitivity if you really love music. Never use them, period. Today, they are also obsolete-- in the extreme!
(3) Use the BEST passive attenuator to control all your music sources. The attenuator can easily lose the signal's power and dynamics unless it IS the best. If it is, then NOTHING can compare with it. Ladders and "L" pads are the ways to go here.
(4) Find, or have custom built, a phono preamp that outputs the exact same voltage levels as a good CD player, DVD player, or computer sound card.
(5) If you want great sound from digital, you can use any really good deck or transport, and run it into a MYTEK Stereo 96 or BENCHMARK (DAC 1), or other, etc., mini-studio DAC. To spend more bucks, you can use LYNX Studio stuff, and there are things even better than that-- such as Sonic Studio, DAD, Pacific Microsonics, etc.
There's no need to throw big bucks at mega-buck studio rigs, however. Simply use the best interconnects you can get on basically good digital stuff, and you'll be there. If you love Home Theatre, then run it in Stereo and forget about all those bullshit extra channels, which are sales gimmicks. Your stereo system will handily outperform all of them.
(6) Maybe you just want good picture and good sound, and like CDs to sound good also. You can do it all by buying a Pioneer Elite DVD unit. Since Blu-Ray is now "hot", you can find a Flagship model of the 1 or 2 year old DVD units that had cost up to $2000-- for peanuts. I just bought two of these for $399 from a Pioneer Elite T.V./Video store. Bang for the Buck? Oh yeah!
Put good cabling and A.C. cords on them, set one up on Golf Balls, and be pleased!
There it is: Start with the BEST POSSIBLE amps-- Under 2 watts. Next, get REALLY GOOD Hi-Eff speakers. Don't compromise here-- these are a must. They WILL be large. Make yourself think, and NEVER buy a small speaker-- except for your computer or your auto. Next, get the best possible passive attenuator and interconnects. You'll save a pair of interconnects by letting the passive preamp handle all the signals.
Speaker cabling should be really good also. Here, you buy the bulk wire that the ultra-pricey speaker cables use, and get the same performance for about 1/10th their price.
Such a system is simple, has zero amp and speaker problems, and only needs an occasional replacement of source components-- as these have motors in them, etc., and these things do not last like the speakers and amps should.
The best amps and speakers should last through several lifetimes with NO parts failures. Figure about 5 years or less for the things with motors or belts in them.
Tube replacement-- in any amplifier that has under 15,000 hours of use on it-- is pretty ridiculous, and shows extreme disregard for proper design and engineering. It is also the norm, even today, and that is why most consumers hate tube equipment. That is sad, because good tube equipment will far outlast solid-state, and the tubes in it will also.
Tubes are like auto tires. Some people run them right and they last a long time. Others like to "burn 'em up". In reproducing music, that is stupid, as conservative operation sounds much, much better if the equipment is designed and built right.
---Dennis---
.
Edits: 06/07/09
hey-Hey!!!,
Your number 3 point is interesting. While it is indeed possible for a passive to be better than an active, it no where near the absolute you claim. For a low mu, DH triode power stage, you'll need substantial gain to do two stage w/o the linestage...possible, but not optimal. We're making a meal, not cooking some specialized dish...there are *MANY* ways to do it.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Your points are well taken. Here's what I'm doing now, and I like it:(1) Sources: all output 2-4 volts. Both phono preamp and all digital and tape sources.
(2) Interconnects: all are chosen for high transfer efficiency across the whole musical bandwidth. Fractions or multiples of 57 1/8 inches is optimum as far as lengths go.
(3) Attenuator: This has always been problemmatical because every passive we ever bought had SEVERE internal losses. We had to build them, there was simply no other choice. Internal wiring is all Siltech or Kimber multistrand silver. All lead lengths are exactly the same, including all grounds. The result is spectacular dynamics, neutrality and stunning bandwidth. My fave is an "L" Pad arrangement.
(4) Attenuator link to amps: These are interconnects which are chosen for the same characteristics as the ones that feed into the attenuator.
(5) Amps: are simple 2-stage, direct coupled, zero feedback single-enders. The input tube must have a high amp-factor, and also be able to fully drive the output tube. Input tube grid-leak to ground is kept at the highest possible resistance to keep signal losses at a minimum. I want that load in the attenuator, NOT in the amplifier.
(6) Link to speaker systems: These are commercially available speaker cables, or bulk multistrand silver wire. Each leg has 3 13ga. multistrand wires in parallel. Lengths are critical, and are the same for every wire type or brand. Fractions or multiples of 57 1/8 inches.
(7) Music posts on amplifiers and speaker cabinets: I feel that these should be of the same brand and be identical. Spade lugs used on speaker cabling are therefore, the same at each end of the cable, and must be chosen to work with the metallurgy of the music posts used. Also, these spade lugs must work metallurgically with the wire in the cable, not against it. Is this overkill? I just remember it from my mining engineering days in Butte, and apply it here. Signal break-in direction is marked on each cable, so no one will try to reverse the cable, once it's broken-in.
---Dennis---
Edits: 06/07/09
57 1/8 or multiple of. Is this related to SWR or standing wave ratio that I pay close attention to in RF (radio frequency) applications.
It's just one of those things that work well. I'm not pretending to be able to calculate all of the musical frequency rise points-- those would be different for different kinds of music anyhow.
In any case, there would simply be too many of them-- you could get one calculation right-- for a certain condition, and then the wire would be off for other considerations-- during the same piece of music!
So, this is not like R.F. where you are calculating for a certain frequency. In music, you have a smorgasbord of frequencies-- all at once, all the time you're playing music.
I think it's just a compromise-- where more things go right more often than for other lengths-- when carrying varying music signals.
One thing I have not done is to find out if this is just a reaction to miniscule amounts of 60 HZ or 120 HZ stuff (or multiples thereof) that is a contamination accidently carried by the wire. (disregarding where the wire may have picked it up from).
So, really, it's not completely thought out-- why the effects occur.
They do, however, and so I leave you with a mystery: why?
---Dennis---
"So, really, it's not completely thought out-- why the effects occur.They do, however, and so I leave you with a mystery: why?"
If you can't explain it then we only have your word on it.
And your word is questionable after all you've said.
Most of what you say just sounds like gobbleygoop to normal, rational people.
You and Jeff really need to get a grip on reality. You both seem to live in a dream world.
Say "hi" to the fairy godmother for me.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 06/10/09
I stand amazed. Gobbledegook!
And normal, rational people! Tre, there are many normal rational people. And normally they understand simple, honest, rational commentary very well.
Why don't you?
---Dennis---
"understand simple, honest, rational commentary very well."
I understand that most of what you say is BS.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
hey-Hey!!!,
----"So, really, it's not completely thought out-- why the effects occur.
They do, however, and so I leave you with a mystery: why?"
I would go so far as to question this part: They do...
So far all we have is what appears by all his writings to be a high caliber snake oil salesman. He's at least a salesman, and the rest is not far behind by all the evidence he's presented.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Yeah, I can't wait to hear this too!
Edits: 06/08/09
All of Bob Fulton's wiring were in multiples and divisors of that length Gusser. Its a shame you never were on the scene to meet him, he was one of audio's best, very best, IMHO.
Jeff Medwin
OK, now we have magic length wire?????? Oh brother.
At this point nothing surprises me.
Carry on.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Substituting politics for simple physics again, are we?Go ahead! It's your own equipment you have to listen to....
---Dennis---
Edits: 06/10/09
Dennis, just what are the physics involved in 57.125" wire lengths?
Fairy dust. Don't choke on it.
Too late, you already have!!
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
'Simple physics'
It's not obvious to me what principal of physics applies here. Can you explain?
P.S. I had a couple of courses in physics in college and grad school, but can't recall any principal that relates.
It's kind of like Motocross or Jet-Ski racing (both of which I love).
When you generously give away a great tip you learned before you won the last race, the competitors don't want to hear about it!
You are an idiot! (They HOPE).
It's Standard Human Behavior-- being blind while observing the glories of Nature.
Of course, you can be blind at your own expense. The guy who gave you the insight is not responsible for your failure to be interested in it.
This isn't all bad as it just lets the generous tip giver use that advantage a little while longer, until competition is finally forced to explore it.
By then, of course, you've got new stuff which is even better.
They NEVER LEARN.. No problem-- It's ALWAYS BEEN Standard Human Behavior. It is boring- and that is why guys like myself reveal a little bit now and then-- we enjoy life more when the competition gets better.
---Dennis---
What principal of physics applies to using 57.125" wire in audio?
It's not a hard question, unless you do not know the answer.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
That wasn't much of an answer. In fact, it wasn't an answer at all.
Whatever ...
"that is why guys like myself reveal a little bit now and then" . . . for these pearls of wisdom? You are in a forum of learned, experienced people and yet you choose to talk down to them? Your humility is breathtaking, Dennis.
I would never talk down to any of you-- learned or not.
And learned, I do not question.
EFFECTIVE is what I might very well question. DESIRABLE and effective.
I do, however, have an obligation to my fellow man to be honest. I also have an obligation to my customers and to this forum-- to give only that which really does work well, and which also, will not compromise the trust that people place in me to build the very best.
I don't have to do these discussions, as I have nothing to gain from them, since I never mention my company name or its products by name.
There are, however, some great advances that have been made that can benefit the DIY person-- so why shouldn't he have those?
---Dennis---
Tre,
Never did I say "majic" length, those are your words not mine.
We have had this for about thirty years now, you just never knew about it.
Jeff
Denis,
What is the physics (concepts only) behind your 57"1/8 lengths on your interconnects something to do with wavelengths?
I think we are missing the larger issue here. I won't doubt there is energy at 80-100khz from certian musical instruments.
The point is there is no technology yesterday or today that can capture or record it. Nevermind play it back. OK there are instrumentation recorders that can record into the 100khz range. And of course there are video recorders that record in the mhz range. There is no commercial AUDIO system that works at those frequencies.
So what vinyl, analog tape, digital tape system can playback 80khz? Even if there is some magical property at 57.125in there is nothing there in the signal to take advantage of it.
Remember too that 50 to 100khz is the range of frequencies for analog tape bias. 44.1, 48.0, and 96.0khz are the standard digital audio sampling frequencies. Mr. Nyquist says you can't digitize 80khz with any of those.
The wavelength at the very highest (allbeit inaudible) audio frequency of 20,000 Hz is 49,179 feet (in free air). That's 590,149 inches. Now what fraaction of a wavelength is 57.125 inches?
Are we talking about wavelength in a vacuum (where c = speed of light) or in air (where c = speed of sound)?Quick calc gets me (for 57.125 inches):
around 240 Hz frequency in air (at sea level).
and VHF frequency (~205 MHz) range in a vacuum.
Thanks!
Edits: 06/11/09 06/11/09 06/11/09
I was talking about the speed of electrons in a wire, which is slightly less than the speed of light. That is what seemed important to me, given that we were "discussing" the length of speaker cables and some magic length of 57.125 inches.
Sound doesn't travel down the speaker cable, electrons do.
Can't seem to fathom the significance wrt audio. Does gear induced resonance (for instance) in the MHz range effect electrical lines transmitting audio information?
Thanks, again.
mikeyb,What are you talking about?? Trumpets have LOTs of power at 80 kHZ, and a concert harp was the widest band instrument Mr. Fulton measured, with lots of energy at 110 kHZ. He also measured organ resultants in Severance Hall at 2, 1, 1/2 and 1/4 of a HZ, shaking an Oak table containing his tape recorders. This was all done maybe 30 years ago.
20K is not correct at all. Bob's big speaker was plus or minus 2 dB 12 HZ to 80 kHZ. Every wire run in it was cut to a multiple or divisor of 57 1/8th inches. I know, I own a pair, (Premiere 12s) and I have also built several P-12s in my lifetime.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 06/09/09
"Trumpets have LOTs of power at 80 kHZ, and a concert harp was the widest band instrument Mr. Fulton measured, with lots of energy at 110 kHZ. He also measured organ resultants in Severance Hall at 2, 1, 1/2 and 1/4 of a HZ, shaking an Oak table containing his tape recorders."
May or may not be true but we are talking about RECORDED music here. What recorder can record 80Khz?
Get a grip man!
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Tre',Recording equipment in the chain was custom modified to have as wide a bandwidth as possible, so as to mimic music.
Also, resultants are herd in the mid range, from ultra high frequencies.
Music is not bandwidth or dynamically limited.
Jeff
Edits: 06/10/09
"Recording equipment in the chain was custom modified to have as wide a bandwidth as possible, so as to mimic music."
I don't care how custom the equipment might have been, there is not a recorder out there that reproduces 80Khz.
"Music is not bandwidth or dynamically limited."
For the most part you are right about music. But we are not talking about music. We are talking about RECORDED music and RECORDED music is bandwidth and dynamically limited.
You live in a dream world Jeff. You need to get a grip on reality.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
So...what was the BW? Did it reach 80kHz?
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
I would like to know the tape speed and head gap width used. It is possible to record and playback 80khz with stationary heads. However this would require custom made heads and extensive transport modifications not to mention the electronics rework involved.
I tend to agree this never happened!
now that you've given him the answer, I am sure we'll now hear from him.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
It's still not an answer. Because even if they could record and playback 80khz, and if the trumpet does have energy at 80khz, it still doesn't answer the 87.125inch cable legnth. Even 800khz is far longer than that electrically.
hey-Hey!!!,
I know it makes no sense, not even close. Not even by the Religious Fanatic sorts of standards commonly seen applied to percieved audio nuance.
cheers,
DouglasFriend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Edits: 06/10/09
O.K. Even at the total inaudible frequency of 110 kHz, the electrical wavelength is over 100,000 inches, making 57.125" a very very small fraction of a wavelength. My point is that there is no theorectical magic to 57.125", that I can see.
Whatch your language, by the way.
mikeyb,
Yes, it took an engineer the likes of Bob Fulton, to determine that length 31 years ago!!
Yes, those initials were to act as an exclamation point, because its not like me to post like that.
Jeff
"Yes, it took an engineer the likes of Bob Fulton, to determine that length 31 years ago!!"
Based on what???
you have to imagine just what sort of 'engineer' Bob Fulton was, wouldn't you...:)
That should simplify it adequately, yes?
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Douglas,You are so clueless!
You have to "imagine" and criticize negatively everything that is foreign to you.
Did you ever read old Stereophile magazines, when they gave his speaker a Class A / "State of the Art" rating in its day??
Have you ever seen and heard all the great sounding audio products he tastefully engineered, or the specialized trumpet mouthpieces he crafted? Ever hear the L.P.s he recorded and mastered?
The book in audio history is open on you, "the pre-eminent public criticizer". So far I see a half solid-state / half pentode tube amp from you, or was it Gary Pimm?
Lets see what you accomplish in audio, besides getting yourself kicked off every audio Forum on the web.
Jeff Medwin
Edits: 06/09/09
Let's see Jeff, shall we count the number of bannings? You're quite well ahead of me; 2:1 at a minimum. As to stuff I have designed, you've heard none of it, so by your own criterea, you're in no position to say anything about it. Of course, you take up only what supports your own PoV so I am not in the least suprised by your poor manners.
In any case, I can either explain what I've built, or step aside and support such a discussion. If you think I have copied something of Gary's( or anybody else for that matter ) and claimed it is my own, let's see a comprehensive accusation if you please.
So far it looks like your bile is entirely devoted to those who *CAN* criticize your claims; it isn't you, just your opinions. Your agenda is rather trivial, and transperant.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
I thought your numbers seemed very very high. Indeed, my calculator suggests that the wavelength of a 20,000Hz sound in free air is 0.678 inches. Even the wavelength of a 20Hz tone is only 678 inches. Anyway, I think Dennis is pulling your/our chains with the 57.125 inches thing. Actually, it's pretty funny that he got such a rise out of so many of us.
"Anyway, I think Dennis is pulling your/our chains with the 57.125 inches thing. Actually, it's pretty funny that he got such a rise out of so many of us."
I think that's about right. You can't win the argument because neither D.F. nor his gormless acolyte knows enough physics to understand what is being said against their zany ideas. It's best to ignore them.
I work with RF for a living. A wavelength of .678 inches corresponds to a frequency of 20,000 GHz not Hz!
Try this calaculator:
http://www.csgnetwork.com/freqwavelengthcalc.html
C being speed of sound, f in cycles per second, and wavelength in units to match C...so if you give C in feet/second, you'll get wavelength in feet...so given C is ~1100 ft/second in air, the ~.05 ft lambda is .66 inches.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
I was referring to the electrical wavelength of a 20 kHz signal, not the acoustic wavelength. What we are 'concerned' about is the length of the wire in terms of electrical, not acoustic, wavelength. A wire 57.125 inches long is a minuscule fraction of the wavelength of a 20 kHz signal, so I doubt that transmission line effects pertain.
too little thinking, too much typing...:)
In any case, it will take very little to show that the length of no consequence...now since it'll be wrapped up and likely coiled, other effects might come into play. recall if you would the so-called facts of his claims on grid stopper resistance values, specified to less than an Ohm, and obtained by paralleling multiple multi-MOhm resistors in parallel...all with no recognition that it was likely tertiary effects involved( primary would be change in R, secondary, change in perception, aka placebo, and tertiary stuff like shunt capacitance perhaps...:)
Looks like more of same to me in this case.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
I'm running an Empire 2000 E/III with a stock Bottlehead Seduction and it sounds fine. I've been thinking about moding its power supply to something LESES-like or starting from scratch w/ a new schematic.
My idea is to start looking at a whole array of phonos that have been done in the past. Do you have the Sound Practices collection?Here you can start looking and thinking: for instance on RIAA-- how do you want to accomplish this? Are you going to use feedback loops? How about ONLY feed-forward sections with No feedback? What will that do? Mr. Paravichini had an inductor tuned RIAA once-- what about that?
Or, shall we NOT do RIAA in the phono (preamp), put the output into the digital realm, and THEN use computer software to get it really right-- and also have as many curves and choices (for different recordings) as we like? The computer sound card could also output the magic-2-4 volt level, and we could put all of the vinyl recordings onto the computer at very high resolution. We would not have to wear out our records anymore-- let the computer play then! That solves a lot of problems right there! That sound card better be really good! Call LYNX Technologies in Southern California. They are also experts on GOOD computer power supplies-- music computers gotta have those.
Once you decide how you want to do this-- and for what reasons-- the next thing is how do you preserve all the dynamics? (Feedback RIAA, for instance, can sometimes be accused of dynamic compression). Maybe that computer RIAA is starting to look good now....
Wait! We can feed-forward the RIAA corrections-- make each step a positive feed-forward. How do you want to engineer this? Can it get too "wild"-- that is-- try to add dynamics where they aren't on the recording. (Will this thing suffer BLOAT?).
OK-- enough said. Just start reading and looking at schematics. And very carefully assess cartridge characteristics while you're at it. You'll have to decide which one you're going to use-- preferably for a long time. Then, you can design a power supply for your phono when you decide on the circuit(s).
---Dennis---
Edits: 06/07/09
Dude,
Talk to Poindexter about commissioning a "Musical Machine". You get 6 VERY nice triode WPC.
Poinz's craftsmanship is absolutely 1st rate.
Eli D.
Noticed he is using 6072 now instead of 5965. Knowing Eric.............am sure it makes a difference.
"The Sound of One Hand Clapping is Crashing by Design" HKM
AFAIK, Poinz is using carefully matched sets of 6GK5s in his latest iteration.
The 12AY7 family has a high R P . Using said bunch, instead of a 12AV7 family type, will only exacerbate the marginal gain problem Poinz has become aware of, with tubes whose mu is in the 40s.
Eli D.
~!
"The Sound of One Hand Clapping is Crashing by Design" HKM
hey-Hey!!!,
For your $3k budget, I'd look to a DIY-ist to build someting for you. A PP, Class A, EL84, 6AU6 E-Linear front end and a pair of 12B4 for a bit more gain would do very nicely as an integrated. A single-stage choke input filter with enough capacitance to tame ripple would do quite nicely.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Re your suggestion of a choke input for Class A push pull. I am testing out my build of a 47 push pull amp, which I designed with generous borrowing from Gary Pimm's designs. I am thinking of shifting to a choke input, and think the resulting lower B+ voltage would work fine with other changes I would want to make.
What I was wondering was whether a choke input offers the same kind of potential sonic advantages to a Class A push pull circuit that many folks have suggested it does for Class A single ended.
hey-Hey!!!,
There are a few reasons I like the LC filter. Very gentle on the rectifiers, as the current delivery is *MUCH* more constant v. the cap input. Less variation in current delivery means less variability in current delivery to the primary side, and for DH tubes I think that is quite important.
Now, for a Class A, PP design will have some current variation. It is happening at twice the fundamental's frequency and is dependant on the linearity of the final's. If they've got mostly 2HD, we'll have very little variation, and for one with lots of 3 HD, we'll have lots of it.
So...what does that leave the PS having to cover? and what does that have to do with how an amp will sound? I think that a 'perfect' PS is *NOT* what the SE folks are after; the PS performance seems to have much to do with the desired colourations...so there it is...more questions, eh?
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
Post a Followup:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2009, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ Go Green ]
[ Take5 ]