|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.184.213.18
In Reply to: RE: We're trying a semi-split supply... posted by Triode_Kingdom on June 23, 2016 at 17:36:54
The time constant is very long.
It's (C=100uF)-(choke-resistor in series)-(220uF)-
and then 2 x (diode-220uF).
And while nothing will totally eliminate the voltage drop you describe, this should "all but" eliminate it. Time and our ears will tell. If it doesn't make a sonic difference, it will have been an interesting experiment. If it does improve the sound, it will become part of our standard rebuild.
Follow Ups:
"The time constant is very long. It's (C=100uF)-(choke-resistor in series)-(220uF)- and then 2 x (diode-220uF)."
You've forgotten the impedance of the load (amplifier). That's what drains the supply and determines the time constant. That aside (and in addition to the points I made previously), the diodes will degrade the ability of the supply to maintain voltage at the channel driven hardest. If this happens, does it really matter if the other channel continues to operate unaffected? The channel producing the majority of the sound will fall on its face sooner because it doesn't have access to all the capacitance of the supply. As for sonics, I wouldn't waste the time. The unwanted effects of the diodes can be easily quantified with basic test equipment. Sorry, I know that's not what you want to hear, but this modification will perform in a way that's entirely predictable.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Since what we're adding is extra filtering, I don't think we're increasing the impedance of the power supply. But as you alluded, we'll try it and see. If it doesn't sound good, out it goes.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: