OTL Asylum

OTL, Output Transformerless Amplifier User Group.

Return to OTL Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

A salute to Dickie and Macovski

74.192.34.244

Posted on November 4, 2012 at 06:05:53
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009



I'm not sure of the detailed history of the OTL amplifier, but I think Dickie and Macovski must have been amongst the earliest pioneers. They published an article in June 1954 on a "Transformerless 25W Amplifier for Conventional Loudspeakers." The sub-text below the title of the article is "A Low-Cost High-Quality Amplifier Using No Iron-Cored Components." And that is literally true.

I've just finished building something similar, using an OTL amplifier design by Christian Lopes, but with the same power-supply idea of Dickie and Macovski. Four 6082 output tubes per channel (equivalent to 6AS7, except 26.5V heaters). It sounds great. Picture attached.

Does anyone know the early history of the OTL? Who was the first to build an OTL amp for low-impedance speakers? Are there any such published designs predating Dickie and Macovski?

Chris

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 08:41:14
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Geat looking amp.....Is this the setup withOUT a tanfourmer in the power suppl...it run right off the 120AC coming in from the wall into diodes....??.... Do you have any other OTL....To know how one sounds with a tranfourmer for the B+.....THanks

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 09:52:24
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
I don't think there's too much of a difference, as far as I can judge. In all the OTLs I've built the predominant characteristic of the B+ supply is a sawtooth waveform with a sharp rise and a more gradual decline. This one looks about the same as the others. Of course the capacitors only get recharged every 1/60 of a second rather than every 1/120 s, so there'll be a higher amplitude ripple, other things being equal. There is a bit more hum than I'm accustomed to with my other OTLs; it's still only audible right up close to the speakers, but it can be heard, unlike with the Tim Mellow OTL I built, for example. I'm not sure yet what the cause is; it could be something to do with the heater wiring, which brings some unusually high AC voltages around the chassis. Also, I normally use regulated DC for the heaters of the input tubes, but not in this one of course.

As far as more subtle audible differences are concerned, I haven't done much serious listening yet, and I've not yet tried it on my best speakers. I usually like to run in a new OTL for a while on less valuable speakers before I do that. I'll let you know in due course.

Chris


 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 12:49:20
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
As far as more subtle audible differences are concerned, I haven't done much serious listening yet, and I've not yet tried it on my best speakers. I usually like to run in a new OTL for a while on less valuable speakers before I do that. I'll let you know in due course.



Boy you got that right....lesser speaker in any new amp setup for sure....As for the sound diff...one thing i have found with the Circlotron circuit design...is if i keep my B+- at about 140v it sounds best to me...My AC coming in from the wall is nuts here in fl...
Day it can be 110-05..night it 125-29...day the sound is sweeter...when most other find the day sucks with all the can-openers an how Knows what on the line an going next door...
Thanks for any input on OTLS
Is this a Circlotron OTL circuit design?....an what is your B+-...

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 17:09:23
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
AC regulation is poor here in Texas too. I've seen between about 118V and 124V here. When I measured earlier, B+ was about 156V. I didn't correlate that with a mains voltage measurement, though. The amp is a totem pole design; I don't think a circlotron is possible with the Dickie/Macovski style of power supply, since circlotrons require isolated power supplies. Right now I'm grappling with some arc-over problems; maybe I didn't burn in the 6082 tubes for long enough with heaters only. (I wish I understood exactly what the burn-in process is actually doing, though!) I think also I was a bit too quick with going to a direct switch-on rather than gradual with a variac.

I think I can answer some of my questions about OTL history now. Futterman filed his patent in July 1953 (and mentions using 6082 tubes, in the patent). Dickie and Macovski published their article, with fully detailed schematics, in June 1954 (again, using 6082 tubes). Then Futterman published an article in October 1954. I've not managed to get a copy of that yet, so I don't know what tubes and details were. I assume Futterman's patent would have been "secret" until it was granted (December 1956). So it looks as if Dickie and Macovski, and separately Futterman, may have invented the idea of OTLs for low impedance speakers independently. Maybe Futterman's publishing of his October 1954 article was triggered by being "scooped" in publication by Dickie and Macovski?

Anyone know any more of the history?

Chris

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 17:22:11
Hi Chris !

Just few question :
Except that your DIY Amp is OTL , it is real MTL ( Main Transformer Less ) to ? , as was the original Dickie Macovsky Amp which was powered directly from main 110VAC power line ?
Did you run that yours OTL Amp directly from your house AC power line ? , or is powered & properly isolated via some isolation transf. ?

Best Regards !

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 17:39:44
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Well, let me quote from the article by Dickie and Macovski:

"As with all power-transformerless equipment, care must be used when connecting to other pieces of equipment to see that the cold side of the line is connected to the chassis. Although this is readily achieved, the use of a small isolating transformer would eliminate the need for caution."

Of course, now we would connect the chassis to true ground, whilst the signal ground would be the "cold" side of the line. But again, "a small isolation transformer would eliminate the need for caution."

Chris

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 18:27:10
My strong opinion is that if you use some proper main isolation transf. which include electrostatic schield between primary & secondary coil than you well achieve two important goal :

1) You well Reduce significantly Very present LIFE HAZARD DANGER caused from accidental reversing pole of power cord , or .....

2) You well Reduce significantly Hum & Noise generated from your OTL Amp .

BTW , Totem Pole OTL Amp architecture is more prone to generation of Hum & Noise than other OTL Amps , generally speaking special care have to be taken on correct phasing between all rectified DC power sources and related AC power sources , B+ & B-, negative bias source , AC filament source ,& etc ....., only in that way any Totem Pole OTL Amp well work satisfactory stable .

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 4, 2012 at 19:18:22
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Hi Banat,

Let's proceed with an academic discussion, with the sub-text that the isolation transformer is in use...

I think there tends to be an excessive paranoia about the use of direct mains-connected equipment. It is true in the past there was no polarisation of power plugs, and that therefore the polarity of which wire in the power cord would be live and which neutral was essentially random. That is not the case any more. If one were to verify the proper polarisation of a power socket today, then it would remain the same tomorrow, and indefinitely into the future.

Anyway, as Dickie and Macovski say, the need for caution is eliminated by using an isolation transformer.

Of course, one could always construct scenarios where some something goes wrong: "what if an unknowing person took the amplifier and plugged it into a different socket that was wired the wrong way?" Actually, one could build in safeguards to protect against that. But in any case, one could construct scenarios where *any* mains-powered equipment could become dangerous: "what if an idiot child took the equipment on an extension lead and climbed into the bath with it?", for example.

About hum, I've only recently been making detailed measurements for my various OTL amplifiers. My day-to-day amplifier is a totem-pole design by Tim Mellow. My DVM is pushing its limits to measure any hum at all on the speaker outputs. I'm finding about 300 microvolts, which is just on the borderline of what my meter can detect. There is certainly no audible hum, even with Lowther speakers of about 100dB (1 Watt at 1 metre) sensitivity. Next time I have my circlotron running, I'll measure that. I would agree that, other things being equal, one might expect a circlotron to do better than a more asymmetric topology. Of course, in practice other things aren't equal, but I'll be interested to see how it fares in comparison.

Best,
Chris

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 5, 2012 at 09:04:30
Hi Chris !
I don`t found that we slip away in any form of academic discussion here !

And trust me ! , it is NOT some Paranoia ! , or something from OTL Circlotron based performance vs Totem Pole performance story , actually every time when I see someone like you that have build new DIY OTL Amp that fact make me happy for real !, but also I think that Amp operator Security is always on the First place for me to !!!
Few more things :
Danger from somehow reversed main power plug is always there , but exist at least several more Real hidden way to potencialy get live & danger current on Metal Amp chassis !, special from an OTL ( MTL ) Amps , that`s include `live` loudspeaker cables & loudspeakers boxes too , `live` interconnect cables between that Amp and other audio equipment , including that other audio equipment to .
One non related but somehow related example to :
Long time ago as experienced TV repair man I was repairing bunch from EI NIS produced Black & White TV tube receivers which have been powered directly from 220VAC main net . Those tube TV receiver was build in very thick wooden box ,and all that TV set command buttons & switches was made from non conductive plastic , so theoretically the risk from elektro schock was reduced to minimum .
BUT against that from factory `safe` unit set-up I was informed from others TV mechanicus that several innocent people was lost their lives in very strange way only from using that main powered tube TV sets !
Maybe it is ironically to say next ; but fact is that`s old EI NIS B/W TV tube sets have been used wonderful sounding Philips based SRPP tube OTL Audio Amp part , which was consist from one pair of PL86 tubes driving one special 800 ohm / 3W fullrange speaker .

Best Regards !


 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 5, 2012 at 14:18:48
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
I think if you are careful and treat the chassis ground as something different from the output section ground, you might be able to make this work. But I would use a seperate power transformer for the driver section, so you can hook up signals from the real world without getting in trouble. I would also be very careful about fuses in your supplies!

With regards to hum, you might play with the phase of the filaments for the output tubes. You can set them up for cancellation, which can be a helpful trick. If the DC currents in the output section are properly balanced any sawtooth will be also cancelled.

Be careful! The fist time you draw a healthy arc from measuring something with the oscilloscope may have you rethinking the mains/transformer thing!

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 5, 2012 at 18:40:05
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Hi Ralph,

Some interesting points there. I thought about it, but I couldn't see any way to dissociate the output stage signal ground from the input stage signal ground, because at some point the two have to meet, and if they are different, there will be hum, or worse. Output stage ground has to be mains neutral, I think, and so as far as I can see there's no way to avoid having mains neutral as input stage ground too. But once one has got over the problem (really a bit of a non-problem these days with polarised sockets) of ensuring neutral really is neutral, then that is not such a great deal, I think. Sound sources, such as a CD player or MP3 player, are typically two-prong powered, i.e. they are not grounded, so they don't particularly mind if their signal ground wire is held at neutral rather than mains ground. Of course, one would want to check, recheck and triple check that neutral was really neutral first, but once that is established, it ain't going to change!

A large additional safety measure, I think, is to make sure (a) that the chassis is connected to true ground, and (b) to use high amperage back-to-back rectifiers connected between chassis true ground and the signal ground (mains neutral). E.g a 35 amp bridge rectifier, with +/- terminals shorted together, and the two AC terminals connected between chassis ground and neutral. This allows neutral to float relative to ground, as it will and must (typically by some fraction of a volt), but ensures that neutral and ground can never be more than 2 x 0.7 = 1.4V apart, and should take care of those unlikely possibilities of the amplifier being relocated to the dreaded unchecked, and mis-wired, power socket. (It would cause the main breaker to trip.)

The oscilloscope is another thing; that needs to be floating, indeed, otherwise there would be a big hum issue since if it were grounded it would have something of order 0.2 V or so (in my house, at least) between its ground and the signal ground. I have to float my oscilloscope in a similar way if I'm making measurements on the output stage of my circlotron, for similar reasons.

Something that really interests me is if you have any further insights on the early history of OTL amplifiers for driving low impedance speakers. As I was saying, the earliest design I've come across is in the Futterman patent filed in July 1953, followed by the detailed Dickie & Macovski article in June 1954. I'm guessing that these were likely to have been independent inventions, in that probably Futterman wouldn't have circulated his patent idea until it was granted. Were there any earlier low-impedance designs published, I wonder?

Best,
Chris

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 7, 2012 at 16:09:37
by the way


 
The Father of OTL Amplifiers

Julius Futterman is the first man, in 1954, to create an OTL amplifier, a tube amplifier that needed no output transformer. Over the next three decades Julius's circuit's unique ability to express musical beauty virused the world establishing him as a Master of the thermionic arts.

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 7, 2012 at 16:26:53
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
But I'm curious as to where Dickie and Macovski fit into the story. Their article, published in June 1954, presents an OTL also. They have a lot of details, and they report quite a lot of detailed measurements of its performance. So they must have constructed it at least by early 1954, probably. Was this an independent, and more or less simultaneous discovery, I am wondering?

Chris

 

"virused"?, posted on November 8, 2012 at 06:46:20
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
Is that a new computer-age verb? For me, as an infectious disease doc/virologist, it has a negative connotation that I would not want to associate with Julius Futterman, who was a good person, as well as an innovator. Sad fact is that his work was under-appreciated except by a few. Else we would have been living in a world of OTLs.

 

There were a number of OTL circuits that showed up after the war., posted on November 8, 2012 at 10:02:12
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
Futterman's circuit was by no means the first. His was the first to be commercially built, even if it was only just by him.

 

RE: There were a number of OTL circuits that showed up after the war., posted on November 8, 2012 at 10:12:24
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
I don't think I said Futterman was first. One of the other guys may have done so, but I take your point. The circlotron idea dates back to the mid 1940s, does it not?

 

RE: There were a number of OTL circuits that showed up after the war., posted on November 8, 2012 at 13:49:11
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
Right. I meant to post my response one level up.

Not sure when the Circlotron first appeared, but the Cecil Hall patent is from 1954.

 

RE: There were a number of OTL circuits that showed up after the war., posted on November 8, 2012 at 15:49:14
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
I found a website giving some history of the circlotron. This also has Cecil Hall as the first (patent filed June 1951, according to him). The splendidly named Alpha M. Wiggins, sometimes said to be the inventor, filed a patent later, in March 1954. Between those two is what sounds like the first OTL circlotron, by Tapio Köykkä (patent September 1952). But that was for an 800 Ohm speaker, so I suppose it hardly counts as OTL in the spirit that it is meant these days.

I didn't manage to track down the actual articles for OTL amplifiers prior to Futterman's 1953 patent and Dickie and Macovski's, and then Futterman's, 1954 Audio magazine articles. These were all for low-impedance speakers (16 ohm, typically), and so genuine OTL in the modern sense. Of course these were all totem-pole, not circlotron. I suspect that earlier OTL articles, such as Brociner and Shirley (Audio Engineering, June 1952), which I couldn't locate, were for high-impedance speakers.

Chris

 

That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 06:46:25
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
more and better high-impedance, high efficiency speakers.

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 09:10:42






Hi Lew !

I can only agreed with you ! , I think that mostly of today modern electro dynamic speakers is mainly designed for SS Amps or WOPT Tube Amps , but not for OTL Amps .

BTW , Here is the few pictures from my modest collection of vintage EI NIS 800 ohm / 3w full range TV speakers , with associated small OTL SRPP Amp they sounds was very good .

Regards !

 

Thanks, Banat,, posted on November 9, 2012 at 10:12:08
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
keep up the good work. Aren't there ANY good quality high-Z speakers or separate drivers still being made? I'd be happy with 32 or even 16 ohms nominal. I guess there are some horn systems that fit the description.

By fiddling with the input step-up transformers to my Sound Lab ESLs, I was able to attain a nominal Z of about 20-30 ohms, between 50Hz and 2-3kHz. (I mentioned it here probably ad nauseam.) It drops to around 7 ohms at 5 kHz and down to 2 ohms at 20kHz, but there is a huge improvement just due to the higher Z from the mid-bass to low treble.

 

RE: Thanks, Banat,, posted on November 9, 2012 at 11:55:41



Lew thanks for yours response !

Must admit that here in Europa Nobody make good sounding bass woofer with 32 ohm or 16 ohm , some new production of full range 16 ohm speakers exist but they are very expensive for me and they don`t sound good to my ear , they simply can not reproduce full Audio spectrum with reproduction of full tonal richness , special in lowest bass octave , they can not differ very well Bass guitar string sound from drum Bass kick regardless which Amp drive them .
I was experimenting matching my small OTL Circlotron Amps with standard & relative cheap but very good bass speakers connecting them in series , for example Hungarian made Videoton ( model HA 31 - 1008 ) brand new 12 `` /8 ohm bass speakers are excellent performer for all money and beyond ! when I put four of them in big compression box connected in series = 32 ohm , driving that bass boxes without of any crossover I can hear real good bass performance all toghether with part of lowest middle range , tight and controlled in the same time .
I think that this box combination of 92db/W Videoton bass speakers exceed sensitivity of 100 db/1W far beyond when four of them is connected in series , they need only very small power from OTL Amp to play very loud .
Same thing I made with middle range speakers and with high`s range speakers , except that there I use very simple cross over network .
Now I use two separate compression bass box each with one big EV DL18W bass speaker ,they are with special hand made voice coil of 32 ohm , since one was with broken voice coil and the second one was OK , one guy from Belgrade was made that speakers modification for me that cost me around 80$ , I know that now they not original EV DL18W anymore but they play bass like charm with my small OTL`s .
All these from above I was writing only for better understandment how important is good speakers impedance matching with OTLs for the best sound reproduction , same improvement as you have experienced when you are fiddling with input transf. of Sound Lab ESLs .

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 12:56:39
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Thanks for the pic...i never even seen a 800ohm speaker...What tv were thay in....wild...good luck

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 14:20:06



Hi Tyu !

Those old black/white EI NIS tube TVs with this OTL SRPP / 800 ohm combination production dated first from 1958 , and they are very expensive at that times for average YU customer , but I think to that old TV unit designers have paid Special attention for good sound reproduction from those old B/W TV units.
In the period of the late of 70` some people steel use them every day , and than I had chance to repair them . In the past years and even today some of my customers ask me something like this :
Man do yo want to pickup some old tube B/W `history TV` for free ? , since I don`t want to trash him away.... ? , My answer always is : Yes of course !, knowing that inside of this old junk exist that`s for today very rare 800ohm/3W speakers and bunch of very good tubes.

Best Regards !

PS : ( I want to Apologize to member - cpotl - for my Non Intentionally Thread Jacking !!! )

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 16:27:40
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
No problem! It's interesting to see those 800 ohm speakers!

Chris

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 9, 2012 at 21:54:03
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
But still, I'm intrigued to know: is there any recorded published OTL design for low impedance (let's say less than or equal to 16 ohm) speakers prior to Dickie and Macovski in June 1954? It still seems Futterman had the prior claim, in his patent of 1953, but I'm guessing that was not in the public domain, and his published artilce was later, in October 1954.

Chris

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 10, 2012 at 04:18:12
Hi Chris !

I have no precise answer to your question , but there is two old article which have little beat of historical insight in OTLs evolution .

First article is -Output Transformerless Amplifiers- from unknown author , published in feb.1957 on to Wireless World magazine (?) ,and second one is -More Output Transformeless Amplifiers - from same unknown author .
These link to this articles is come from Mr. Douglas Self ( UK ) home page .

 

AC Room feeds....., posted on November 10, 2012 at 05:51:55
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Thanks for all the info on this AC setup....I have been doing work on some of this....with my new room 18'X 40' X 14' all open...moveble wall so i can set the room up like it is now 18'X 25'....
you say

But once one has got over the problem (really a bit of a non-problem these days with polarised sockets) of ensuring neutral really is neutral, then that is not such a great deal, I think. Sound sources, such as a CD player or MP3 player, are typically two-prong powered, i.e. they are not grounded, so they don't particularly mind if their signal ground wire is held at neutral rather than mains ground.

As we know comeing in to the house is 240AC....thats two 120Ac legs...one earth...so when we take the 120 off.... for most Audio an what ever ..like fridg...hairdryer...
We only have one earth to make the nutel-grond out of...one thing i found at the Main AC box that is setup for the AC house code wonted me to run the earth an the nutel on the same point bar ...but in diif places on the bar like 10" diff.. an all the boxes were setup this way...
Earth at one point an nutrel on the other side....like the same but diff...nuts for Audio an the best sound..
This setup a diff in the earth& nutrel that looks like it was made to make noise come in to any 120 ac plug
So this needs to be stared at one point on the bar...if all earths& nutrel are put at one point as we know there well be less diff an less noise!

So just no that any noise that on the AC wall earth.. is on the nutrel side of the two prong plug!
..So in my room all earth&nutrel Are stared.....

But i have found the two hots that make up the 240 Ac feed that come in to the main box....sound diff... i have runs that are for Amps only...one 120Ac line back to the main box....that the two 120 Ac feed are in...some of these 120 Ac Amp feeds are on one 120 leg some are on the other 120...this is the way all houses are setup
An i have found From a sound stand point it all most like phaseing...
One 120 Ac feed has better base.. an sweeter highs....I gess most just think...WEll it just AC...as with all thing Audio... i put the room togather for sound..i wont the best i can get....i think Others Needs to look at this... after all i have a lot of $$$$ an time in this...some may say it my lifes work...
Have any others Here looket at Ac Setup in the Home ..after all... all Audio starts at the AC an this is a ezey fix...
Goodluck

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 10, 2012 at 19:57:02
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
The Wireless World articles are very interesting, and full of information! So Fletcher and Cooke, in November 1951, were getting 14W into 16 ohms, albeit at the price of using 12 6AS7 tubes. And 33 W with 20 tubes. Not very efficient, bearing in mind that Ralph gets 220 W from 20 6AS7 tubes! But still, a very early OTL producing significant power into low impedance speakers.

A fascinating history...

Chris

 

RE: AC Room feeds....., posted on November 10, 2012 at 20:05:23
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
"..So in my room all earth&nutrel Are stared....."

Hmmm...if I'm understanding you correctly, you are connecting the earth and neutral wires in your listening room? I'm not sure the wiring code people would approve of that! But in practice, it's probably not as risky as is sometimes claimed. If I'm right in my understanding of what you are saying, I'm curious to know if it leads to any noticable (audible) differences?

Chris

 

RE: AC Room feeds....., posted on November 10, 2012 at 22:46:09
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Look the only Earth-ground-neutral Thats coming in to your or anyones house is one thing.....your house if it upto to days code or not.. has 3 wires coming in from the pole...two 120 legs an one ground!
The 240 used for dryers,cooking,hot water,120 runs all my an yours audio amps preamps DAc otls TV... i think Ralph makes his MA3 that can be ran off the 240...not for sure he can say?
.An i have been looking at that...it a nuts to bring the ground from the pole...an then put it on your ground spot in the earth... this makes a new gorund lope a diff... then take that to you house box...this has too bring all the noise from next door an down the street.. in to my an yours sound rooms....
My thinking is to have two ground rodes...one for the pole an for the TVs an Dryers an heaters... But then the other for my sound rooms...got too sound better...right... low cost upgread in sound...Just use the 120AC leg an new ground for the neutral...
An as for the diff in sound of a star-ground the lowest noise you can get in a amp or preamp is to run all feeds to one spot- we call it a star point ...
If you can... stars need to be used for the ground an B+ An B-...for the best sound... an less noise in any setup... Much less hum with stars....the base an topend are much better...good luck

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 11, 2012 at 09:46:16
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
Why were those amplifiers so inefficient? Did they use something other than a Futterman-type or circlotron output stage?

Kevin Covi, who used to inhabit the ASOG and made some of the most informative contributions there, was very knowledgeable about the history of the OTL idea. He is around somewhere on the internet, unfortunately though, not here. But his article on circlotrons can be found on Google (or at least, I found it a few years ago) and in it he considers the alternative output stages.

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 11, 2012 at 10:21:18
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
No, it wasn't a totem-pole. It was two cathode followers, driven in antiphase, with the speaker connected between the two cathodes. Each cathode follower was actually composed of four paralleled 6AS7's (so 8 triode sections), with a 64 ohm resistor from the cathodes to ground. So not very efficient. But it was, however, completely symmetrical, unlike the totem pole.

The totem pole idea was around before Futterman, as I understand it. Futterman's breakthrough improvement was to use the live speaker terminal (i.e. the point where the anode of the lower output tube connects to the cathode of the upper output tube) instead of true ground as the "ground" for the phase splitter driving the output tubes. This gives a much more nearly balanced output stage, etc.

Chris

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 11, 2012 at 12:09:40
Hi Lew !

That very interesting & valuable technical article from Mr.Kevin Covi is not anymore available in full form anywhere on the NET .
Except this one mirrored page which come from Audiodesignguide home page :

Best Regards !

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 11, 2012 at 23:11:09
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Thanks for the post on Mr.Kevin Covi ...








there this also...........

Sound Lab A-3 Equalization
Kevin Covi


Background
When I first hooked up my A-3s (I'm driving them with homemade OTLs similar to the older, 12-tube version of the Atma-Sphere MA-1s) I adjusted the equalization according to the suggested settings in the owner's manual: LOWs at 0, MIDs at 0, and BRILLIANCE at 2 o'clock. While I was astounded by the increase in resolution over my Magneplanar MG-IIIas, I noted that the midrange seemed a bit reticent in comparison. The vocals on one recording in particular, "The Weavers: Reunion at Carnegie Hall, 1963" (Analogue Productions APF005), with which I was very familiar, were not as immediate as I was used to. The first thing I tried was to move the MIDs to +3. This was much better, but now I found that my amps were clipping on the another record I use for voicing my system, "Marni Nixon Sings Gershwin" (Reference Recordings RR-19), something that had never happened on the Maggies.

While the A-3s were about 2dB less efficient than the Maggies, I thought surely they should be easier to drive, given that the Maggies range between 3.5 and 4 ohms and electrostatics are known for being synergistic with OTLs (translation: a high impedance load). To help understand what was going on, I measured the A-3 impedance, and much to my surprise, with the LOW/MID settings at 0/+3, it dropped to 2.4 ohms at 1kHz! (Yikes)

When I removed one of the backplates to see how the equalization was accomplished, I found that the LOWs were adjusted by selecting one of four different taps on the primary of the bass transformer, and the MIDs were controlled by placing different values of inductance in series with the primary of the bass transformer. The "0" setting used 5mH and the "+3" setting connected the bass transformer directly to the input (no inductor). The high-frequency toroidal transformer was connected to the inputs through a single-pole high-pass filter where the series C=48uF (two 24uF polyproylenes in parallel) and the shunt R=5 ohms (four 5 ohm 10W in series/parallel), for a corner frequency of 660Hz. This explained a lot, since the presence of the 5 ohm resistor meant that the overall impedance could be no higher than 5 ohms above the corner frequency, so I knew my measurements were not in error.

When I asked Roger West why he used such a low impedance, he explained that,


"The toroids require the lower impedance coupling network (48ufds, 5 ohms) to prevent the toroids from being saturated by low-frequency energy feeding back from the high-voltage mixer. The lower impedance reflected to the secondary of the toroid reduces the low-frequency energy coming from the secondary of the low-frequency transformer. Our conventional high-frequency transformer doesn't require the lower impedance, but it doesn't have the benefits of the toroid."
To better understand what was happening when I moved the MIDs from "0" to "+3", I disconnected the toroid so I could see how the impedance looked with just the bass transformer. I found that, by itself, the bass transformer was also a tough load. At low frequencies with the 0dB tap, it was purely capacitive, measuring 40 ohms at 20Hz, which is equivalent to a capacitance of about 200uF. When the MID tap is at "0" there is a 5mH inductor in series with the bass transformer, so at 100Hz the impedance becomes inductive and starts to rise. But when I moved to the "+3" MID tap, the impedance stays capacitive and kept on dropping to below 4 ohms before it started to rise.

Tweaks

At this point I realized that needed modify the crossover network somehow to raise the minimum impedance. I knew I needed some inductance in series with bass transformer, but that 5mH was too much, since it started rolling off the bass transformer too soon (160Hz), given that the toriod didn't kick in until 660Hz. So here's what I did:


replaced the box containing the tapped inductor (5mH, 10mH and 20mH) with a Solo 1mH copper foil inductor from Michael Percy. This moved the corner frequency for the bass transformer up to 350Hz and increased the bass minimum impedance to 5.5 ohms.
removed one of the four 5 ohm resistors in the high-pass filter, which lowered the corner frequency to 440Hz and increased the toriod minimum impedance to 7.5 ohms.
raised the value of the coupling cap from 48uF to 60uF which further lowered the high-pass corner frequency to 350Hz.
These changes filled in the midrange to the point where the tonal balance of the modified A-3s was very similar to MG-IIIas. But there the similarity ended, as the Sound Labs had far better resolution throughout the bass and midrange. These changes also brought the minimum impedance up from 2.4 ohms to 3.5 ohms, which was much easier for my OTLs to drive, but still on the low side.


Now that I was happy with the balance, I replaced the polypropylene coupling caps with polystyrenes. I used thirty 2uF, 100V, tin foil caps in parallel. Given its small size, I could fit only six caps on the existing pc board, and the rest were taped into a brick that sits on the bottom of the speaker cabinet, where there is plenty of room. I purchased the caps from http://www.southernelectronics.com/index.html for $9.50 each. These caps are a bargain at this price, and are sonically superior to any polypropylene, regardless of price.
I cannot over emphasize the improvement the polystyrenes made. These speakers really deserve better caps. I had been running with the BRILLIANCE control at 2 o'clock, since going beyond that made the highs somewhat brittle sounding. But with the 'styrenes I was running wide open, so


I connected the primary of the toroids directly to the crossover board, completely bypassing the BRILLIANCE control for a further improvement in clarity. I also wired the crossover inputs directly to the speaker terminals, thereby bypassing the equalization jumpers.
At this point I was thrilled with every apsect of the A-3s but one: dynamics. When I really cranked the volume my amps were still straining a bit, even though there was no longer any apparent clipping. I considered bigger amps but instead I wired the backplates for bi-amping, as I just happened to have another pair of OTLs hanging around since I had previously bi-amped the Maggies.


I left the highs connected to the Cardas input connectors and connected the bass network to the (now unused) "-6" equalization taps.
With two 125W OTLs per speaker, the A-3s really came to life. When I shared my modifications with Roger, he told me that early Sound Labs had provisions for bi-amping, but that some customers damaged their amplifiers when they accidentally had one of the inputs out of phase. According to Roger, "This apparently cancels the flux in the audio transformers in the region of the cross-over frequency and thereby makes it a near-short-circuit. For this reason we stopped doing it." I suggest you heed Roger's warning and approach biamping with caution, but I have had no problems.

In fact, the amps are loafing now that the highs and lows are split between two amps. I'm feeding each amp with a full-range signal and relying on the A-3s internal crossovers. I considered placing a high-pass filter in front of the treble amps so I could bypass the filter ahead of the toroids, but I rejected the idea because any DC offset would surely cause them to saturate.

In retrospect, I could have lived with my system with a single amp per speaker, but the A-3s really needed more like 200W. If you're like me and can't afford a big 200W OTL, you might want to consider bi-amping with two smaller amps if you feel you need more power.


###

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 12, 2012 at 08:19:10
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
Banat, Thanks for finding a URL that leads to Kevin's whitepaper on OTL output stages. I was about to post a copy that I downloaded years ago.

Tyu, this is from your quote of Kevin's experience optimizing the A3:

"When I shared my modifications with Roger, he told me that early Sound Labs had provisions for bi-amping, but that some customers damaged their amplifiers when they accidentally had one of the inputs out of phase. According to Roger, 'This apparently cancels the flux in the audio transformers in the region of the cross-over frequency and thereby makes it a near-short-circuit. For this reason we stopped doing it.'"

When I was first playing with the Australian transformer for use as a "treble" transformer, there was no way to know which connection was in-phase with the SL bass transformer, so I tried it both ways. It quickly became obvious which of the two choices was "out of phase", as the impedance of the speaker never got above 4 ohms, more like 1-2 ohms across the entire audio spectrum. And indeed the little NAD solid state amplifier that I use to make Z measurements shut itself down during the measuring session. Kevin's quote reveals the mechanism of that observation, having to do with the flux. In contrast, and as you know, the in-phase hook-up results in a very nice impedance curve for an OTL amplifier. Based on Kevin's quote of Dr. West, my experience makes sense. Funnily, when Dr. West experimented with the Australian transformer, he first posted an impedance curve that was crazily low compared to my results. After much back and forth between him and me, he figured out that he had at first wired the AU transformer out of phase with his bass transformer. His revised data ended up agreeing with mine, but he did not take pains to withdraw the negative opinion of the AU transformer and the erroneous data of his post on SLOG. However, he is now offering a new toroid for the treble of his speakers that has a much wider bandwidth (more extended bass response) than the old toroid, more like that of the AU transformer. I like to think we influenced him to make this change.

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 12, 2012 at 08:22:04
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
Thanks.
I wonder whether that option is entertained in Covi's article on OTL output stages. Now we have the article we can find out. I think the answer is yes.

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 12, 2012 at 08:31:22
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Yes, it's figure 3 in the Covi article.

Chris

 

RE: That's what the audio world needs now...., posted on November 12, 2012 at 10:19:10
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Yes I saw the Dr West post where he got the tranfourmer setup right...Well He Is A DR.....right...You Know what i mean...


Well Dr west is hell-bent on the ...Goodthings the toroid tranfourmers dose....on paper..Well MartinLogan went to the Toroidels for there line...An other SAY that thay do something...Soundwise....wish.. Lew Would Spends Some of his... Big Money... An get the new ones from Dr West...or better... Dr West Just Give lew a pr to see if there worth the up gread if not lew could give back.......Hehe Just kidding lew...but i trust what you say when you say What you hear..that all...an you have the SL..an the OTLs i have...well same type....Goodluck

 

Sound Lab backplate, posted on November 13, 2012 at 10:14:17
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
Brian at Essential Audio in Chicago has a set of the new backplates and also a set of MA-1s. He is quite excited about the improvement- and from his description its sounds as if the improvement is very much like what we have seen in the mods in some prior threads here on the forum.

But unlike the Australian transformer mod, this one is apparently easily driven by MA-1s (more apparent power), so I expect the new speaker to appeal to a wider audience. Dr. West is expecting to have this new backpanel in the speakers at THE Show (CES).

 

RE: Sound Lab backplate, posted on November 13, 2012 at 12:33:19
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
But unlike the Australian transformer mod, this one is apparently easily driven by MA-1s (more apparent power......................

did i miss something.....The Australian tran did not work well with the M1s?????......or is this Dr West So... thay just have too be better?

 

RE: Sound Lab backplate, posted on November 13, 2012 at 13:05:31
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
As I understand it, no-one using MA-1s has been able to make them work. However, the phase thing that Lew mentioned may well be a variable!

 

RE: Sound Lab backplate, posted on November 13, 2012 at 13:17:01
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
To respond to your statement about the MA1 and Tyu's question, my amplifiers make only about the same or slightly less power than an MA1, using only four 7241s per monoblock. Yet my amplifiers are driving my modified 845s with consummate ease, absolutely no sense of strain whatever.

However, it is true that the two guys (among about a dozen or so) who reported problems with driving the modified backplate are using MA1s driving Sound Lab M1 or A1 speakers. So, I don't know whether it's the MA1 or the M1/A1 speaker that is presenting a unique problem. The two who have problems also were using the "second generation" AU90 transformers, ones that were made in response to the sudden demand for them created by the initial popularity of the idea of using them in Sound Lab spkrs. Prior to that, the AU90 had been discontinued by the manufacturer in Perth, Australia. I got the very last pair of the original production run, and mine were used when I bought them. Although the manufacturer Rob MacKinlay has vigorously denied that there could be any difference between the original batch and the second (and last) batch of AU90 transformers, it remains a possibility. But I would not blame it on the MA1.

 

Phase may well have been the variable then. nt, posted on November 13, 2012 at 13:48:20
Ralph
Manufacturer

Posts: 5145
Location: Minnesota
Joined: April 24, 2002
-

 

HoHo....Ho, posted on November 13, 2012 at 15:46:26
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011



Wow...Thanks Lew An Ralph for the Info...i gess i misset this...as i Have stated Here....i have all stock Acoustat 121 interfaces..with the stock Hi-Low tranfourmers....an with the Mod of just geting All but the caps in the setup OUT...is what set the Acoustats Free...i can now drive them with any amp..M60 not even in the game till i did the mod..... stocks.dynaco Mk3 An get Not only much more output...but the best sound i have ever had tonely...but for the Quad 57s...Some thing is not right with there Tranfourm setup...An the OTLs being Diff amps...phaseing can kill the output...Well nothing Is Ezey
GoFigg.
.

Well it a good thing someone had the balls to do this Mod for All Of us an Dr.West ...Now people can hear what some of the best OTLs& ESLs can Sound like.... Great for sales We Hope....An good for people that never new how good it can be... We know comeing to town on the 12/25/2012... goodluck

 

Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 14, 2012 at 05:44:30
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011



Any feedback on this OTL setup....I like this guy...He like to help all Diyers....An that help his also...Fair $$...Thanks

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 14, 2012 at 19:13:31
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Sure, there's feedback--look at that 33 uF capacitor on the left-hand side... Sorry, I couldn't resist that!!!!

Seriously, though. Yes. I noticed his new OTL article the other day. I've not studied it in detail; I think it was all about headphone OTLs, right?

His articles are often a good read, I think. I was intrigued a while back by his "ultralinear OTL," http://www.tubecad.com/january2000/page17.html. I was on the point of building that, having acquired a set of EL509S tubes. In the end I used them in an Alan Kimmel circlotron. Maybe, though, I'll try it sometime. The problem is I've already got four OTLs, and I can't ever make myself dismantle one to build another, so they just keep accumulating. And they're not really the sort of thing to pass on to non-technical friends, because they need a certain amount of "nursing."

An Atma-Sphere style circlotron is also on my "to build" list. In that regard, in case Ralph happens to drop by, I'd be interested to have an opinion on the following. My latest OTL (the one at the start of this thread) has an unusally high output impedance (about 8 ohms), and I've been listening to it on my "spare" speakers, which are old Klipsch Forte II's. These have a rather weird impedance vs. frequency behaviour, ranging from extremes of about 3.5 ohms minimum at 150 Hz to 100+ ohms maximum at 2000Hz. (Rising again below 150Hz, and falling again after 2000Hz.) It seems to me that the sound I'm getting, in comparison with other much lower output impedance amplifiers, is a bit "tinny" in the mid range. I'm suspecting the frequencies around 2000Hz, where the impedance is so high, are providing the amplifier with the opportunity to give excess emphasis there.

I think Ralph argues that constant voltage (zero impedance) source is not the ideal, and that constant power is preferable. And thus low output impedance is not necessarily the key thing to strive for. But most speakers, I think, don't have the huge spread of imepdance vs frequency that these Klipsch Fortes do. Is there something you would recommend to try to tame the speakers a bit?

My main speakers, which I don't risk on a new OTL until it's established its reliability for a while, are Lowther DX3s. Would those fit well with an Atma-Sphere circlotron?

Thanks all, for any input,
Chris

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 15, 2012 at 03:37:29
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
I Just like to look at the Circlortron...layout






Lowther DX3s. Would those fit well with an Atma-Sphere circlotron?

I have only Had the Circlortron OTLs!.....
When i got in to Diying Tube Amps An MosFet SE..Sand Amps...I Thought that like the Highend Audio Amps an Pramps An crossover the older Krell form the 90s...An Speakers that had to have that type of power ...like B&W 801s-802s...Apogees...Acoustats ESLs An... SoundLabs that at that time were like driving a Dead Short...That A bal.Diff output Amps An full.Bal.preamp were the only way to get the sound i needed an like....
But Now i Know ...That like Most things in life get two thing right is not as ezey as one thing...Diff Amps an Bal it self is not EZy too do!On paper it the Shit...Paper make no Sound...

Now as for the Sound i like... out of the best sounding tube amp i have ever had...It a pr of Stock M60 moded by me...
An the Pr of MA1s i have Diyed
The circlotron is the most stabel amp i have ever seen..The frist one i read about were Lab amps...it the ezeys OTL to Diy i know of...An if ran SE on the inputs..it the Bigest,Fullest,Fastest,Sweetest,...Just All the Things that i got in to audio for...I have owned a lot of tube amps an diyed minny but thay were all tranfourmer output SE,pushpulled....with the heat here two 6550s KT88...I can live with..
So what is the Down side to the circlotron...or any other OTL tube amp...I live in Fl...it aveg tem year round 80 deg. HOT...The OTLs sound so good to me that like ESLs i can get a neff...The MA1 is great sound but i am cooking my self to have it on in the room i am in or in the other room AC max out......the M60 is even too much...

So with Your Lowther DX3s or the Fortes...that i have had an sold minny pr in the 80-90s to me the best sounding older Klipsch...
The circlotron is A must DIY for you... If Ralph come by are not... you got diy these amps...You are worth it.... An you lov sound ...well it looks that way...an you can run the US 6080s or 6AS7s an 4 tubes per amp...an get SOME of the best sound Ever..It the Diff. output That sets these OTLs a part.....
You got Have Fun...Every min....
All.this Is just a tube heads O-pine...Good luck,,,Hohoho...

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 15, 2012 at 07:51:10
kablemetal@gmail.com
Distributor or Rep

Posts: 15
Joined: February 8, 2008
Futterman was not the first to invent/designed the first OTL.Frank H. Gilbert came earlier with a working design called the "Stephen's OTL" and it was published in Radio & Television magazine in March 1953 page 45-47.

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 16, 2012 at 19:57:22
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
I like to read Broskie too. I can learn a lot from his way of rationalizing a circuit. Have you guys read his article where he claims that the circlotron and the totem pole of Futterman are actually not different? I can't argue, because I cannot understand his argument.

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 16, 2012 at 22:29:42
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
Yes, I think he is right. It is really just a question of how you order the sequence of tubes and power supplies.

Chris

 

RE: A salute to Dickie and Macovski, posted on November 17, 2012 at 04:34:14



Hi !

I think that this top schematic on this picture is Stephen`s OTL Amp .

Best Regards !

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 04:46:16



Hi Chris !

Here is one more old paper with two OTL schematic for your interest :

BTW , My personal opinion is that Mr.Broskie have made Wrong conclusion in that his article where he claim that OTL SEPP circuit have same characteristic as OTL Circlotron Circuit .

Regards !

 

kss....... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 06:24:47
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011



Thanks for your time....an any info on OTLs ESL tranfoures...it all good
I take all with a big grian of salt....Mr Pass..An Mr Broskie...like tHe King of OTLs Ralph...help All us Diyers...Dose not get any better than people that know there not going to have a aridgnel thought..Blind men cant spell....it all be done... Like the Kiss of death here... when it worket... it was...what.....Happy turky day...if that works for you guys... If not just have as mush fun as you can we all have sweet sound even if it with my 800ohm speakers.......good luck

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 06:27:13
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
To be more precise, one has to read the full discussion Broskie gives in that article "Cars, planes and circlotron," and it is perfectly correct, I think. The actual differences between the totem-pole and the circlotron and the other variants he discusses there are really associated with where the reference ground point is. This can lead to a somewhat asymmetric driving situation, as with a traditional totem-pole, or to a symmetric situation, as with a circlotron. But it is possible to shuffle the orderings of tube/power supply/loudspeaker/ and make other variants that share the driving symmetry of the circlotron, and so on.

An essential point in Broskie's arguments is that the power supplies are viewed as ideal; that is to say they produce a steady DC voltage and they behave as short circuits to AC at audio frequencies, so that they allow the audio signal to pass through unimpeded. Real OTL power supplies provide a pretty good approximation to this ideal, I think.

Chris

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 07:05:03
Chris

I must admit that I was read that Mr.Broskie article long time ago ! , he was made Wrong conclusion from many reason !
One of the reason is the that SEPP OTL circuit nature is asymmetrical , but Circlotron circuit is normally symmetrical circuit ( balanced bridge ).So many Amp stage of this two different types of Amps have to be designed in tottaly different ways for normal & practical Amps operation .
I think that SEPP circuit can be naturally perfectly symmetric only in SS SEPP circuit applications which employs perfect matched PNP & NPN SS devices .

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 07:50:11
cpotl
Audiophile

Posts: 1002
Location: Texas
Joined: December 6, 2009
You do have to read what Jon Broskie is saying in that article carefully, and fully, in order to understand his points, I think. He is certainly not saying that an ordinary totem-pole output stage is symmetrical like a circlotron. He is quite careful and precise about what he says, and it is, I think, correct.

Chris

 

RE: Broskie.... OTL, posted on November 17, 2012 at 08:20:22
Chris

I do not say that you are probably 100% right!!! , since I was read that Mr.Broskie article last time maybe before 2 or 3 years ago , and admit at that time my real understanding of English language was pretty poor.
So even today `` Mr.Google Translate `` is my very good friend :)

Regards !

 

Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 17, 2012 at 14:57:53
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
You may recall years ago that Ralph had shall we say a disagreement with Harvey Rosenberg. Harvey tested an M60 and then insisted on installing inductors in the output stage power supplies. (I cannot recall whether he converted the supplies to inductor-input or just added inductors to create a CLC filter.) He then claimed he had made a major improvement in the sound. Ralph argued that adding inductors with considerable DCR was a no-no. No one gave in, but I think Ralph was correct in light of Broskie's dissection.

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 17, 2012 at 19:40:45
by the way


 
I loose count of all the used Atma equiptment available I have seen in the last 5 years, if it was a truly as reliable as stated I would think
only a death of the owner would put the equiptment up for sale.
The other manufactures of current production OTL equiptment never seem to chime in with the same questions or problems. Joule Electra, Einstien, and even the Trancendent bunch seem to be quite content with their equiptment.
Makes me wonder...

My vote would be for Rosenberg.

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 17, 2012 at 20:26:10
by the way


 
I guess atma's are kinda like ducati motorcycles, owners just want to ride but end up being a mechanic, with atma owners, the audiophile seems to end up being elec, techs learning how to repair their equiptment.
Ralph should be proud he has so many certified repair techs in the field.

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 18, 2012 at 03:55:11
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Some get it some dont...Tube amps of any kind are not for most......HOT tubes........But you say

with atma owners, the audiophile seems to end up being elec, techs learning how to repair their equiptment.
Ralph should be proud he has so many certified repair techs in the field
....
I am sure he is.......tell us about your OTL...?

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 18, 2012 at 04:17:44
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
As for Harvey.... he put reglaters in the M60s... so ended up with 1000Lb OTls....But then as we know he move on to what he said was the best OTL never made...
Davied Berning amplifiers using the ZOTL technology exceed the performance of traditional OTL tube amplifiers by properly matching the tube impedance to that of the speaker. Berning amplifiers depart from traditional OTL amplifiers in that they do not require a large number of hot power tubes to supply adequate current for driving Speakers...
Then giZmo move on two the big OTL in the sky...good luck

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 18, 2012 at 04:29:28
by the way


 
My OTL's are a pair of Mark Levinson 333 mono's.

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 18, 2012 at 04:44:27
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
So you just stop by to tell us what?...
I Did not know Levinson made OTLs...Oh Wate Mr Levinson did not make any 333 amps... some one just put His name on there amps......Hehe.......
I have Old Krell KSA150s sand amps.. thay still sound great.. If there recapet an bias up right.... Most amps need work after 20years.....I have done this work to the krells.....I dont see my self as a teck.....Goodluck

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on November 18, 2012 at 07:11:06
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
So, because a tiny percentage of very happy Atma-sphere owners meets here to have a friendly discussion of circuit design, it must mean that Atma-sphere amplifiers, more than any of the other OTL designs you mention, have problems. It matters not I guess that we have contributions also from owners of Transcendent and Futterman-type amplifiers on this forum, and all of us get along with each other just fine. There are so many flaws in your "logic" that it does not seem worthwhile even to point them out. You could just go away, since you apparently don't even like tube amplifiers, let alone OTLs. That would be best, unless you have something constructive to add to the conversation, like why do you like ML 333 amplifiers? What speakers do you use them on?

 

RE: Phase may well have been the variable then. nt, posted on November 18, 2012 at 13:50:02
Lew
Audiophile

Posts: 11012
Location: Bethesda, Maryland
Joined: December 11, 2000
FWIW, I sent Chuck Cabell, one of the guys who had bad results with MA1 driving M1s via the AU90, a very carefully drawn schematic showing how to effect correct phasing. He re-examined his wiring with my schematic in hand and said that he had wired the AU90 "correctly" meaning "in phase" with the bass transformer. At present, he has switched back to the toroid made by Sound Lab, and he is happy. C'est la vie. I would not switch back to the toroid (and to the cockamamie crossover) for any amount of money.

 

RE: Phase may well have been the variable then. nt, posted on November 18, 2012 at 15:13:17
tyu
Audiophile

Posts: 963
Joined: April 19, 2011
Lew....
For years as you know... i can be a NutJob...
But some wont take the time...like you an i well too geting what we call.. good sound...I think most think that thay can just Buy it...this has never worket for me...But some say this is good a nuf.....Well i wont it all..an well do the work like you to get it..
Hell after all were all that matters in the end....Yes we wont other to have the leg up from what we find but...most dont wont it...I gess it works best if you Hear it for your self...
All i can say.... what a gift This mod is... it like a res. load in my case 16ohm 20w has been taken off my Mind... it like i always new the ESLs would work this way..An sound this Good...
An all the mods i have done to just my OTLs..with this mod to the ESL crossovers..would my stock amps Been a nuf. ......................................................................................................................Hell No!...if you dont go you dont know...An it the work.. geting there is half the fun...have fun every min if you can.....Happy turky day....good luck

 

Wasn't Mactone in Japan making OTLs in 1964?, posted on December 16, 2012 at 19:02:14
Des
Audiophile

Posts: 2126
Location: Great Barrier Reef
Joined: August 3, 2000

By the way I knew Jon Syder who worked with Harvey Rosenberg in NY.

Des

 

RE: Harvey Rosenberg vs Ralph, posted on February 28, 2013 at 18:35:06
LineArrayNut
Audiophile

Posts: 1953
Location: Tenn.
Joined: December 10, 2002
The only reason I sold my M-60's was that they represented 2 house payments when I was laid off. They were easily the most reliable pieces of amplifier that I had used, withstanding much abuse.
I *like* the loudness button!

 

Page processed in 0.035 seconds.