Home
AudioAsylum Trader
DIY HiFi Forum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

For Sale Ads

FAQ / News / Events

 

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.

You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login


Login to access features only available to registered Asylum Inmates.
    By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username:

The Name that you picked or by default, your email.
Forgot Moniker?

 
 

Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".

Password:    

Forgot Password?

 Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:  
Your Email:  
Subject:  

Message Comments

   

Original Message

RE: Lux91 monoblock running very hot

Posted by Henryhleung on July 19, 2013 at 07:03:42:

Incidentally, while on the topic of 300B plate voltage..

Thorsten, is it possible to lower the operating point of the Lux91 tubes? Ie reduce the voltage from 400v to 350v? I'm curious whether this would not stress out the tubes as much and increase the life of the 300Bs. Would this be possible with the Lux circuit and would it require much modification. Sorry if this is a newbie question or if I'm not making sense.

The reason for asking is because people are often surprised or disbelieving when I tell them my mono blocks are rated 16w. Some reckon its impossible for a single 300b implementation, others say my tubes will burn out very soon. I've read your previous posts about 300b suggested operating points being conservative. But any idea how much more quickly the tubes will be eaten up in the Lux91 implementation?

Thanks
Henry