In Reply to: RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? posted by kobasa@xs4all.nl on April 8, 2021 at 13:29:37:
Hi
the Tango is fine but I never seen a heavy test as you can get with the method I say.
There is no way to get a great swing with low distortion, this is the fact.
The results I show is fine and the resonance is quite normal in a s.e. with that type of signal.
Regarding the trafo where I done the test, I assure you that is a very good stuff, 3,5 kohm / 8 ohm, ratio 21. Rdc 67 ohm. weight 3,8 kg (just for info)
In attach another test done on three trafos with a sw developped by F, Montanucci in Audioreview magazine where I have a collaboration and writing some article. The sw is propietary .
There is the plot of charateristic of impedance and phase . As you see there is a resonance at 2-3 kHz for each one ( with some difference of course). Until the resonance the modulus follow the inductive part of trafo, after resonance it follow the capacitive part.
Also the phase switch at that time.
On the little window on top you can see the value for some freq. and at 20kHz you read capacitance and not H.
This is a problem in the real world and there aren't measurement of this type available, just to understand what happen inside the trafo.
In addition another test with a s.e. trafo without nucleus ( the same FIAT on previous image), as you see when it reach 2 kHz ( the resonance frequency) it became linear; until 2 kHz the effect of magnetic circuit is important.
The third diagram is a Fiat (same of the test explained) trafo for 300B measured with my method, 1 watt, the primary closed on 750 ohm ( like 300B); double C, laminated 0,1 mm, this is not amorphous
Last is the THD vs. Frequency test; good results
In few word driving the OT by secondary is the easiest way to understand a lot of things specially at different level of signal, that is the main goal
Walter
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 00:56:45 04/09/21 (31)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 09:10:26 04/09/21 (30)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 09:57:52 04/09/21 (29)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 11:02:05 04/09/21 (28)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 11:22:40 04/09/21 (27)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 11:41:50 04/09/21 (26)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 12:31:24 04/09/21 (25)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 13:06:54 04/09/21 (24)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 00:01:00 04/10/21 (23)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 02:47:34 04/10/21 (22)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 03:09:16 04/10/21 (21)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 04:47:27 04/10/21 (20)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 05:10:45 04/10/21 (19)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 05:48:17 04/10/21 (18)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 06:27:36 04/10/21 (17)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 07:20:40 04/10/21 (16)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 07:39:09 04/10/21 (15)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 11:32:10 04/10/21 (14)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 13:02:18 04/10/21 (10)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 14:30:54 04/10/21 (9)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 01:29:27 04/11/21 (8)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 04:27:17 04/11/21 (7)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 05:18:45 04/11/21 (6)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 06:04:07 04/11/21 (5)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 06:59:02 04/11/21 (4)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 07:03:52 04/11/21 (3)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 07:20:34 04/11/21 (2)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 07:34:11 04/11/21 (1)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - kobasa@xs4all.nl 08:17:56 04/11/21 (0)
- RE: 38H OPT for 845, so so? - walge 12:35:14 04/10/21 (2)
- Beautiful Amps! - Triode_Kingdom 12:02:03 04/13/21 (1)
- RE: Beautiful Amps! - walge 07:44:13 04/14/21 (0)