Perhaps you confuse slam with "slosh/wobble"? I've never felt a larger transformer is "too much" (I use 160 VA Plitron toroids) though in retrospect I don't think swapping those for a 50 VA Talema would degrade things significantly, if at all.
Filter and coupling capacitance is another story. Increasing capacitance orders of magnitude above what is really needed gives you boomy, sluggish, over-ripe and generally distorted bass response... though as a result of the harmonic distortions there often does appear to be "more" bass. Not in favor of this at all, in case you hadn't already guessed.
Filter and coupling capacitance is another story. Increasing capacitance orders of magnitude above what is really needed gives you boomy, sluggish, over-ripe and generally distorted bass response... though as a result of the harmonic distortions there often does appear to be "more" bass. Not in favor of this at all, in case you hadn't already guessed.
Just completed the my Phonoclone 3, thanks Richard for an excellent kit. The setup is currently lashed together using a 50VA transformer feeding a rectifier board using QSpeed diodes and CRCRC filtering. This feeds the Phonoclone cards.I used Wima MKP caps on the output as opposed to Richards supplied caps (VAL MKPS), as well as using polystyrene film caps to replace the supplied silver micas. Also used 797's for the second opamp instead of the OP27.
First impressions are very good. Comparing to my Linn Linto, the Phonoclone seems more dynamic. Noise is higher but not noticable at normal listening levels. That's a pretty good performance since the Linto is I believe around $2k now. Bass seems a bit light compared to the Linto, but it may be a case of burning in.
So far very pleased. I'll give the Phonoclone a work out this weekend after a decent burn in and report back.
Cheers
First impressions are very good. Comparing to my Linn Linto, the Phonoclone seems more dynamic. Noise is higher but not noticable at normal listening levels. That's a pretty good performance since the Linto is I believe around $2k now. Bass seems a bit light compared to the Linto, but it may be a case of burning in.
So far very pleased. I'll give the Phonoclone a work out this weekend after a decent burn in and report back.
Cheers
Hi Martin,
Give it 48h powered up by way of break in.
Personally I think mica are much cleaner-sounding the polystyrene, that's after trying both...
Ditch the CRCRC(CRCRC...) filtering. Just run the phonoclone off the diodes directly. Better bass and dynamics. If you don't agree you can always hook it back up, but you should definitely give it a try.
Be very careful replacing the OPA27 with AD797. The AD797 requires 0.1 uF ceramic bypass caps on the power pins (see datasheet, its very clear on this point) that are not on the Phonoclone board. At the very least try the OPA27 first, and once you are comfortable with the sound, give the AD797 a try.
Give it 48h powered up by way of break in.
Personally I think mica are much cleaner-sounding the polystyrene, that's after trying both...
Ditch the CRCRC(CRCRC...) filtering. Just run the phonoclone off the diodes directly. Better bass and dynamics. If you don't agree you can always hook it back up, but you should definitely give it a try.
Be very careful replacing the OPA27 with AD797. The AD797 requires 0.1 uF ceramic bypass caps on the power pins (see datasheet, its very clear on this point) that are not on the Phonoclone board. At the very least try the OPA27 first, and once you are comfortable with the sound, give the AD797 a try.
Last edited:
Hi Richard,
Switched out the 797 for the OPA27s, the bass improved and the noise dropped, you were spot on, thanks, must have been instability or oscillation. I haven't tried to eliminate the PS smoothing/filtering yet as I can't bring myself to disassemble my caseless thrown together setup as it sounds so good! - To be honest, originally the Phonoclone build was going to be an experiment and I never thought it would replace the Linto. As this now seems to be the case, would you have any recommended upgrade parts above and beyond the supplied kit parts? I will try your Mica caps but may need to build a second set of boards and use the origial as a mule to try out some options. I note that you have no kits left, are there and bare boards still available?
Cheers
Martin
Switched out the 797 for the OPA27s, the bass improved and the noise dropped, you were spot on, thanks, must have been instability or oscillation. I haven't tried to eliminate the PS smoothing/filtering yet as I can't bring myself to disassemble my caseless thrown together setup as it sounds so good! - To be honest, originally the Phonoclone build was going to be an experiment and I never thought it would replace the Linto. As this now seems to be the case, would you have any recommended upgrade parts above and beyond the supplied kit parts? I will try your Mica caps but may need to build a second set of boards and use the origial as a mule to try out some options. I note that you have no kits left, are there and bare boards still available?
Cheers
Martin
Last edited:
I have parts and boards available, just no more resistor sets. Contact me.
The only passive part worth tweaking above the BOM is C3. Feel free to try whatever specialty audio coupling cap that takes your fancy. The capacitance value itself isn't especially critical especially if the Phonoclone is feeding into a preamp with a high input impedance.
The only passive part worth tweaking above the BOM is C3. Feel free to try whatever specialty audio coupling cap that takes your fancy. The capacitance value itself isn't especially critical especially if the Phonoclone is feeding into a preamp with a high input impedance.
I'd like to bring this design idea I've been working on recently to your attention. It's an add-on line driver (output buffer) board for the Phonoclone, VSPS, or - just about anything with an op amp output stage. It also makes a nifty headphone buffer.
I've held the opinion that the way forward with the Phonoclone etc. was to stop the op amps from driving the interconnect directly. I didn't have enough room on the boards to build in a buffer there, so I suppose this is my answer: separate, general purpose buffers to retrofit or use in new builds.
Full kit of two boards and parts would be <$50, with very special pricing on the initial batch of Guinea pigs, as usual.
I call it ... the "B-board". ("B" for buffer.)
Any interest??
- 1/2 the size lengthwise of the Phonoclone 3 and VSPS300 boards.
- Shared BOM : same transistors, same capacitors, many of the same resistors as the P3 and VSPS300.
- Based on the classic "diamond buffer" circuit (c.f. LH0002)
- Built-in Zener voltage regulator, runs independently of the X-reg in the Phonoclone board, just hook it up to the same V++, V-- unregulated supply as the main boards.
- Zener regulated voltage V+, V- is accessible if you need a regulated source for any other low-current circuit, such as a DAC or a op amp voltage stage part of a preamplifier or headphone amplifier.
- Cheap and simple. BOM is ~~$10 + board cost.
I've held the opinion that the way forward with the Phonoclone etc. was to stop the op amps from driving the interconnect directly. I didn't have enough room on the boards to build in a buffer there, so I suppose this is my answer: separate, general purpose buffers to retrofit or use in new builds.
Full kit of two boards and parts would be <$50, with very special pricing on the initial batch of Guinea pigs, as usual.
I call it ... the "B-board". ("B" for buffer.)
Any interest??
Attachments
Many opamps are just not up to the task driving tough cables. A discrete buffer is always the better choice for the task. It is important to say that a better precision can be obtained if one include this buffer within the NFB loop. This would result in better overall stability and lower DC offset.
Regards,
Venci
Regards,
Venci
Alright, I will go ahead and get some of the B board GZs made up.
Btw the way, I am in favor of leaving the buffer outside the NFB loop, running open loop in other words. This keeps the feedback loop completely isolated from the instability(overshoot, etc)-inducing effects of the cable inductance/capacitance. The sound is better I think.
Btw the way, I am in favor of leaving the buffer outside the NFB loop, running open loop in other words. This keeps the feedback loop completely isolated from the instability(overshoot, etc)-inducing effects of the cable inductance/capacitance. The sound is better I think.
Hi Richard,
Yes, I would be very interested. My analogue side now uses your excellent Phonoclone, digital is via a TPA Buffalo II with Legato 3 output stage. The Legato includes a diamond buffer around the balanced to SE opamp and sounds fantastic.
I have no issue with the Phonoclone as right now I feed directly into a Stax headphone amp, but really need to hook up to the passive preamp section of a Manley Stingray, the Stax and a ADC simultaneously, so the diamond buffer may well provide an advantage.
I think Simonov is correct that oncluding the buffer in the NFB loop is preferential , but I don't believe that it would be possible with the Phonoclone would it?
Regards
Yes, I would be very interested. My analogue side now uses your excellent Phonoclone, digital is via a TPA Buffalo II with Legato 3 output stage. The Legato includes a diamond buffer around the balanced to SE opamp and sounds fantastic.
I have no issue with the Phonoclone as right now I feed directly into a Stax headphone amp, but really need to hook up to the passive preamp section of a Manley Stingray, the Stax and a ADC simultaneously, so the diamond buffer may well provide an advantage.
I think Simonov is correct that oncluding the buffer in the NFB loop is preferential , but I don't believe that it would be possible with the Phonoclone would it?
Regards
PREAMP for DUAL CS511
Hi,
I've recently bought a second hand turntable DUAL-CS511, and i realized that i need a PREAMP in order to hear something(louder and clearer) from my AMP YAMAHA RX_V420. I am asking you what PREAMP will suite me better for my turntable. I think i have the following cartridge (taken from the user manual): DUAL DMS 239, but i dont't know if it is the original one or some replacement cartridge. I will try to have a better look, but i think it has an Output Level: 3.5mV (from the user manual ).
Thanks a lot and sorry for the trouble.
Hi,
I've recently bought a second hand turntable DUAL-CS511, and i realized that i need a PREAMP in order to hear something(louder and clearer) from my AMP YAMAHA RX_V420. I am asking you what PREAMP will suite me better for my turntable. I think i have the following cartridge (taken from the user manual): DUAL DMS 239, but i dont't know if it is the original one or some replacement cartridge. I will try to have a better look, but i think it has an Output Level: 3.5mV (from the user manual ).
Thanks a lot and sorry for the trouble.
@danubiusdan
You need a phono stage for moving magnet cartridges. Since the VSPS Stereo Kit is no longer available, and given your equipment, you can either build your own VSPS or pick up a cheap pre-built or kit external phono stage from any number of places.
@Toaster
Boards are on order, the web page is up, and the pricing is set. Things will come together in 2-3 weeks, promise.
You need a phono stage for moving magnet cartridges. Since the VSPS Stereo Kit is no longer available, and given your equipment, you can either build your own VSPS or pick up a cheap pre-built or kit external phono stage from any number of places.
@Toaster
Boards are on order, the web page is up, and the pricing is set. Things will come together in 2-3 weeks, promise.
Attachments
VPS 300 w/gain
Here's a VSPS with selectable gain (30/4050dB) that I built.
To fit the compact case (FRYS.COM #2090829 $17.99), it's necessary to trim one end of each board 5mm with aircraft snips which happens to be the tops of the letters (VSPS 300).
The first issue was to source solder in screw terminals for Richard's boards which have a 10mm hole spacing. I can find 10mm terminal blocks with ,9mm flat pins but they are too large and the pins are 1.2mm diagonally.
So I got triple blocks w/7mm overall spacing/.9mm pins and vacant middle terminal bay. (digikey #ED1534-ND)
I cut the end terminals off donor triples to become the 4rth section of a 10mm quad.
I removed the 3rd pin/screw from the 3rd bay of the intended assy, removed the pin, and reassembled it w/it's screw in the 2nd bay. A little fileing to the end of the 3rd bay and, with donated 4rth bay, you have a 10mm terminal with extra/isolated bay.
These all fit together on the board in place of R1/(load resistor & loading cap if wanted), and R2/R3 the "gain" resistors, and with a little epoxy for plastic becomes a monolithic terminal station for making changes.
A 4x3 rotary switch w/2 resistors/section and the 3rd step across bay 1&2 of each respective terminal block completes the deal.
Very satisfied with this setup so far-using w/med output (.8mV) Glider and it's dead quiet. Switching gain while in use, no clicks or pops (Swx -Mouser #105-GKS1461-shorts between positions-$13.56)
The values I used for the R2 cascade: 221(on board)/475/1500 yield 221/696/2196; specified is 220/680/2200.
The values I used for the R3 cascade: 475/1500/825(on board). (These are less important but are still pretty well coherent with spec'd values)
When you build this, check your thinking by putting the respective cascade pairs in series thru your ohmmeter, Each swx position should be close to 3K. If it is, you got it right! Think it through when you build it and it'll be right unless your name is Phil!!
Here's a VSPS with selectable gain (30/4050dB) that I built.
To fit the compact case (FRYS.COM #2090829 $17.99), it's necessary to trim one end of each board 5mm with aircraft snips which happens to be the tops of the letters (VSPS 300).
The first issue was to source solder in screw terminals for Richard's boards which have a 10mm hole spacing. I can find 10mm terminal blocks with ,9mm flat pins but they are too large and the pins are 1.2mm diagonally.
So I got triple blocks w/7mm overall spacing/.9mm pins and vacant middle terminal bay. (digikey #ED1534-ND)
I cut the end terminals off donor triples to become the 4rth section of a 10mm quad.
I removed the 3rd pin/screw from the 3rd bay of the intended assy, removed the pin, and reassembled it w/it's screw in the 2nd bay. A little fileing to the end of the 3rd bay and, with donated 4rth bay, you have a 10mm terminal with extra/isolated bay.
These all fit together on the board in place of R1/(load resistor & loading cap if wanted), and R2/R3 the "gain" resistors, and with a little epoxy for plastic becomes a monolithic terminal station for making changes.
A 4x3 rotary switch w/2 resistors/section and the 3rd step across bay 1&2 of each respective terminal block completes the deal.
Very satisfied with this setup so far-using w/med output (.8mV) Glider and it's dead quiet. Switching gain while in use, no clicks or pops (Swx -Mouser #105-GKS1461-shorts between positions-$13.56)
The values I used for the R2 cascade: 221(on board)/475/1500 yield 221/696/2196; specified is 220/680/2200.
The values I used for the R3 cascade: 475/1500/825(on board). (These are less important but are still pretty well coherent with spec'd values)
When you build this, check your thinking by putting the respective cascade pairs in series thru your ohmmeter, Each swx position should be close to 3K. If it is, you got it right! Think it through when you build it and it'll be right unless your name is Phil!!
Attachments
Last edited:
Hi all from a fairly inexperienced Newbie. I am thinking of building a PhonoClone, so reading all I can, though all 172 pages will take a while 
First question. What are the disadvantages (if any) of putting the boards in the same case as the power supply? I am imagining something about the size of a NAIM shoebox case.
First question. What are the disadvantages (if any) of putting the boards in the same case as the power supply? I am imagining something about the size of a NAIM shoebox case.
Hi all from a fairly inexperienced Newbie. I am thinking of building a PhonoClone, so reading all I can, though all 172 pages will take a while
First question. What are the disadvantages (if any) of putting the boards in the same case as the power supply? I am imagining something about the size of a NAIM shoebox case.
My test set up has the transfomers and regulators in the same case as the Phonoclone, with the two 50VA transformers in the opposite side of the case from the Phonoclone, with absolutely no hum, the case is the size of the bigber full width Naim cases. I did make sure that the wires from the input phono sockets to the Phonoclone input were as short as possible.
My final version will however be in two boxes, but I doubt it will be any better.
Regards