Hi Mike,
Well, how are your soldering skills? This is not a silly question, nor is it meant to insult you in any way. I simply don't know how well developed your skills are. Do you have an oscilloscope?
Replacing components for ones of higher quality is not always safe to do, but less dangerous with an amplifier - sometimes. I have had equipment damaged beyond economical repair from this. For example, in a CD player you do not want to touch anything in the servo / DSP area. Likewise for a tuner, leave everything that is not audio completely alone, except for maybe the power supply. Sometimes the characteristics of the components used have been compensated for. This is especially true of speaker crossovers.
I find that normal diodes work great for normal 60 Hz (50 Hz) applications. The fast types are for switching power supplies and can actually create more hash.
To make life somewhat easier for you, it is often more important how a component is constructed than the brand name on it. Polystyrene capacitors are better than Polyester, but you had better be using Mica caps if the area is very warm. BTW, Polystyrene caps are easily damaged by soldering if you aren't careful! The name on a capacitor normally hasn't much to do with it's performance as long as you are buying them from a good manufacturer.
Lastly, please do not quote the entire post, especially if it is very close by.
-Chris
Well, how are your soldering skills? This is not a silly question, nor is it meant to insult you in any way. I simply don't know how well developed your skills are. Do you have an oscilloscope?
Replacing components for ones of higher quality is not always safe to do, but less dangerous with an amplifier - sometimes. I have had equipment damaged beyond economical repair from this. For example, in a CD player you do not want to touch anything in the servo / DSP area. Likewise for a tuner, leave everything that is not audio completely alone, except for maybe the power supply. Sometimes the characteristics of the components used have been compensated for. This is especially true of speaker crossovers.
Some, but not all. Cyrus makes an excellent product.
Look at mine for a good example. There are times a better component makes zero difference where it is in the circuit. I have found some inductive metal film resistors from time to time also. Nasty surprise!
I find that normal diodes work great for normal 60 Hz (50 Hz) applications. The fast types are for switching power supplies and can actually create more hash.
This is critical!!!
To make life somewhat easier for you, it is often more important how a component is constructed than the brand name on it. Polystyrene capacitors are better than Polyester, but you had better be using Mica caps if the area is very warm. BTW, Polystyrene caps are easily damaged by soldering if you aren't careful! The name on a capacitor normally hasn't much to do with it's performance as long as you are buying them from a good manufacturer.
Lastly, please do not quote the entire post, especially if it is very close by.
-Chris
That is especially true in the increasing number of cases, where there is only one manufacturer. The others buy their components from him with their own label printed on, and maybe in a different colour.anatech said:
In some cases you get the same component and the higher price is only justified by smaller tolerance values. That may or may not be an issue from a technical point of view. The prices some people charge for that property can easily justify to buy adequate measuring equipment and match components at home.
anatech said:
The best starting point is reading and learning. That can bring you into a situation, where you don't need to do component rolling anymore. If you know what you are doing, you can calculate and estimate beforehand, which change to a circuit is likely to improve it. It can also help you identify, which improvements are only good for measurements and which for the sonic quality you can and will perceive.anatech said:
That means of course to read and learn not only about technical relationships, but also about human perception. This enlightening comment from Siegfried Linkwitz could be a good start.
Anatech.
I do apreciate your knowledge and the advice you give seems good. However your condecending tone and the way you have picked apart my last 2 posts is really annoying. Whats that about not quoting an entire post? Are you the bloody forum police or something? You guys have actually ruined this thread with your ivory f**king tower viewpoint. Get a life. Im leaving.
I do apreciate your knowledge and the advice you give seems good. However your condecending tone and the way you have picked apart my last 2 posts is really annoying. Whats that about not quoting an entire post? Are you the bloody forum police or something? You guys have actually ruined this thread with your ivory f**king tower viewpoint. Get a life. Im leaving.
Hi Mike
You've come here looking for help, and I think you're in the right place.
If you make a series of bold statements that you seem to be assuming as fact without offering any substantial evidence, you really have to expect to be picked apart. You also won't get far if you come with a set of preconceived ideas from which you are not willing to budge, even in the face of advice from those whose greater experience you seek to learn from.
Anatech has been critical, but his criticism is constructive and that's what you should be looking for.
Not quoting entire long posts (unless it's particularly necessary) is just general etiquette. You clearly didn't know that, and noone is blaming you, but if someone doesn't tell you, you'll never know. Anatech hardly got angry about it, he just politely asked you not to do it in future.
You've come here looking for help, and I think you're in the right place.
If you make a series of bold statements that you seem to be assuming as fact without offering any substantial evidence, you really have to expect to be picked apart. You also won't get far if you come with a set of preconceived ideas from which you are not willing to budge, even in the face of advice from those whose greater experience you seek to learn from.
Anatech has been critical, but his criticism is constructive and that's what you should be looking for.
Not quoting entire long posts (unless it's particularly necessary) is just general etiquette. You clearly didn't know that, and noone is blaming you, but if someone doesn't tell you, you'll never know. Anatech hardly got angry about it, he just politely asked you not to do it in future.
Hi Mike,
I'm sorry you feel that way. I have not been trying to upset you, but rather point out reality and correct some notions that weren't exactly true. The ideas you have are rooted rather deeply and difficult to discuss because of this.
I joined in because of your responses to AndrewT, Panelhead, pacificblue, MJL21193 and valleyman who are very helpful members. We don't expect you to learn everything by yourself, but you are expected to put in a little effort on your own. These people all have more experience than you do, but you didn't seem to accept their opinions.
-Chris
I'm sorry you feel that way. I have not been trying to upset you, but rather point out reality and correct some notions that weren't exactly true. The ideas you have are rooted rather deeply and difficult to discuss because of this.
I joined in because of your responses to AndrewT, Panelhead, pacificblue, MJL21193 and valleyman who are very helpful members. We don't expect you to learn everything by yourself, but you are expected to put in a little effort on your own. These people all have more experience than you do, but you didn't seem to accept their opinions.
Ahhhh, actually, I am one of many.
Well, everyone who has commented is either a hobbyist or actually works in the field. I have worked in audio service for over 30 years, so I can't understand your comments here.
-Chris
Anatech.
I apologise to all for the earlier post and any others which have caused ill feelings.
Yes I am quite new here and I should pay serious attention to those who know their onions - when a person questions your percieved 'reality' its a little hard to accept and buttons get pushed. From now on I'll take things a less personally.
I have since taken the earlier advice and done a little research on the GC. I have to say Im a big fan of Peter Daniel's projects. I have an affinity with his designs from an engineering viewpoint as I myself are simmilarly inclined toward the mechanical arts. Obviously he is a genius on the electronic side of the fence also.
I need to look at my schematics a little more closely but my first impressions are that its possible to implement his 'recipie' of component types & values into my CA 340A. My transformer is centre tapped so the dual bridge isnt possible but I can use the same diodes and PSU cap arrangement. Also the stock transformer in the CA is about 150VA, I think I would need slightly larger smoother caps at the bridge? As I said I need to look at it more closely first. There may be other good GC configs to consider also, but according to the reviews his formula is very very good.
A somewhat more extreme idea is to upgrade the Trafo to a suitable unit which would enable the use of his dual Bridge PCB. The pre sections would then get their own smaller dedicated transformer. I have a degree of certainty that Im on the right lines with this now. Am I right?
Of course there may be some who disagree but I wont be getting into any arguments about it from now on. I will however be paying close attention to any further posts and giving carefull consideration to any and all ideas put forward fronm herein.
I apologise to all for the earlier post and any others which have caused ill feelings.
Yes I am quite new here and I should pay serious attention to those who know their onions - when a person questions your percieved 'reality' its a little hard to accept and buttons get pushed. From now on I'll take things a less personally.
I have since taken the earlier advice and done a little research on the GC. I have to say Im a big fan of Peter Daniel's projects. I have an affinity with his designs from an engineering viewpoint as I myself are simmilarly inclined toward the mechanical arts. Obviously he is a genius on the electronic side of the fence also.
I need to look at my schematics a little more closely but my first impressions are that its possible to implement his 'recipie' of component types & values into my CA 340A. My transformer is centre tapped so the dual bridge isnt possible but I can use the same diodes and PSU cap arrangement. Also the stock transformer in the CA is about 150VA, I think I would need slightly larger smoother caps at the bridge? As I said I need to look at it more closely first. There may be other good GC configs to consider also, but according to the reviews his formula is very very good.
A somewhat more extreme idea is to upgrade the Trafo to a suitable unit which would enable the use of his dual Bridge PCB. The pre sections would then get their own smaller dedicated transformer. I have a degree of certainty that Im on the right lines with this now. Am I right?
Of course there may be some who disagree but I wont be getting into any arguments about it from now on. I will however be paying close attention to any further posts and giving carefull consideration to any and all ideas put forward fronm herein.
Hi Mike,
No problem. You never know how another person will take your typed comments. It's not the same as being face to face.
Your transformer should be fine. There are pro's and cons to each type of transformers. At the end of the day, it's the execution of the plan that matters more. PCB layout is probably more critical than transformer type and winding type. I personally favor EI core transformers over a toroid.
Running the low voltage sections from their own transformer is fine, but not critical. Your regulators should give you all the isolation you could ever need if they are done right. In a discreet design of amplifier, running the voltage amp stage off their own power supply (regulated) brings large benefits. This is a chip amp, so no worries.
My feelings on Peter Daniel's designs are that he sweats many things that I have trouble accepting as making a difference. To each their own. However, make no mistake, Peter is marketing his product like any other manufacturer. His case designs are excellent for sure.
Now, if you do give some thought to what is said, your common sense will probably steer you in the right direction. Remember that everything follows the same laws of physics. Also understand that you need to look at the system as a whole. If you get in increase in performance by using a certain part, make sure it isn't lost elsewhere. Also, some times an improvement does not really exist. If you are convinced the improvement exists, you will hear it. "The Emperor's new clothes"
-Chris
No problem. You never know how another person will take your typed comments. It's not the same as being face to face.
Your transformer should be fine. There are pro's and cons to each type of transformers. At the end of the day, it's the execution of the plan that matters more. PCB layout is probably more critical than transformer type and winding type. I personally favor EI core transformers over a toroid.
Running the low voltage sections from their own transformer is fine, but not critical. Your regulators should give you all the isolation you could ever need if they are done right. In a discreet design of amplifier, running the voltage amp stage off their own power supply (regulated) brings large benefits. This is a chip amp, so no worries.
My feelings on Peter Daniel's designs are that he sweats many things that I have trouble accepting as making a difference. To each their own. However, make no mistake, Peter is marketing his product like any other manufacturer. His case designs are excellent for sure.
Now, if you do give some thought to what is said, your common sense will probably steer you in the right direction. Remember that everything follows the same laws of physics. Also understand that you need to look at the system as a whole. If you get in increase in performance by using a certain part, make sure it isn't lost elsewhere. Also, some times an improvement does not really exist. If you are convinced the improvement exists, you will hear it. "The Emperor's new clothes"
-Chris
Hi Ted,
I use normal rectifier diodes and bridges most of the time. They turn off slowly enough to reduce this problem. I do have an assortment of new, very fast switching diodes. They are for .... switching power supplies.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled topic.
-Chris
They may cause ringing on your supply. Any diode that is fast can easily create this noise because it switches so quickly that it may even excite the inductance in the leads and PCB traces. Over large capacitance will always make this worse.
I use normal rectifier diodes and bridges most of the time. They turn off slowly enough to reduce this problem. I do have an assortment of new, very fast switching diodes. They are for .... switching power supplies.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled topic.
-Chris
Ted205[/i] [B]how about schottky diodes ?[/B][/QUOTE] [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by mikesnowdon said:
You have already found out that you can hear a difference. The next step to audio-happiness is to find out, what works best for you.mikesnowdon said:
Is it the best sound from an objective point of view like in equipment with the flattest response and the lowest THD? Or do you like certain types of "sounded" components that may not be the objectively most correct, but the ones that please you most? To get an example of what I am talking about, tune into the heated debates over tube amps vs. solid state vs. chipamps. Do not go for what people tell you is "best", because they do not know what is best for you. You may find this link interesting, especially the conclusion at the bottom.
You will also experience that your taste changes over the years. What you like best today, may not satisfy you tomorrow, so it is reasonable not to spend too much on tweaking now. You might need that money for tomorrow's tweaks.
I've read quite a number of your posts Mike, where you have been modding this Cambridge amp to your liking.
However, it is sounding very much like the direction you are taking is past modding, and more towards getting a hankering for making something yourself. It's like having a Fiesta and wanting a Ferrari, you can mod the Fiesta but no matter how much you change it, it's still a Fiesta
Cambridge's biggest problem nowadays is the use of cheap parts and cheaper assembly (and plenty of QC issues!). This, I think, is why they have started using the LM3886 - it's pretty much a sure fire way of getting a working, stable amp.
This might be an avenue worth persuing - stop modding the Cambridge, and build something. Even if your skills wouldn't cover design, there are plenty of kits to make, and you have the benefit of having a friend on standby who has more experience!
Think about it
However, it is sounding very much like the direction you are taking is past modding, and more towards getting a hankering for making something yourself. It's like having a Fiesta and wanting a Ferrari, you can mod the Fiesta but no matter how much you change it, it's still a Fiesta
Cambridge's biggest problem nowadays is the use of cheap parts and cheaper assembly (and plenty of QC issues!). This, I think, is why they have started using the LM3886 - it's pretty much a sure fire way of getting a working, stable amp.
This might be an avenue worth persuing - stop modding the Cambridge, and build something. Even if your skills wouldn't cover design, there are plenty of kits to make, and you have the benefit of having a friend on standby who has more experience!
Think about it
Thanks for the link pacificblue. This is an article I am familliar with. My speakers (Modified TDL RTL2's) have upgraded xo caps (Jantzen crosscaps) which brought amazing improvements to the SQ. The last time I read Tony G's article I was tempted to try the Mundorf Solver/Oil's as a small value bypass on the Jantzens. Using something like a 0.1uF baypass wouldnt cost a fortune so its worth a try.
On the point raised about building an amp from scratch: Yes, this is a definate direction I am heading in. But to reiterate, the cambridge is basically a gainclone so in theory a few component changes could bring the SQ up to a level comparible to a good DIY GC. Im just looking into it as a possibility, and I like the idea of taking a commercial design and making it better. Im sure at sompoint I will build a DIY amp from scratch though.
There is one thought which sticks in my mind at the moment: I have a small buzz problem at the moment of which I have tried many things to solve it. So far I havent been able to cure it. So the idea I have (somewhat drastic) Is to get hold of a good GC kit including PCB's, and a good DIY preamp PCB. Then I would remove most of he CA's PCB leaving the Input selector chip and its associated circuitry (including the microprocesor which controls it). Then I would basically build up the kits and install them to make a fully working intergrated amp. I know that its probably easier to just build from scratch though. The idea is inspired by this: Click here.
On the point raised about building an amp from scratch: Yes, this is a definate direction I am heading in. But to reiterate, the cambridge is basically a gainclone so in theory a few component changes could bring the SQ up to a level comparible to a good DIY GC. Im just looking into it as a possibility, and I like the idea of taking a commercial design and making it better. Im sure at sompoint I will build a DIY amp from scratch though.
There is one thought which sticks in my mind at the moment: I have a small buzz problem at the moment of which I have tried many things to solve it. So far I havent been able to cure it. So the idea I have (somewhat drastic) Is to get hold of a good GC kit including PCB's, and a good DIY preamp PCB. Then I would remove most of he CA's PCB leaving the Input selector chip and its associated circuitry (including the microprocesor which controls it). Then I would basically build up the kits and install them to make a fully working intergrated amp. I know that its probably easier to just build from scratch though. The idea is inspired by this: Click here.
Hi,
two extremes in assembling chipamps are Peter's Daniel and Carlos FM.
There are a whole range in between.
Read both and I think you may come a conclusion that your TDLs need something more towards Carlos FM solution rather than the Daniel type which use no smoothing caps at the rectifiers.
But, there are three ways to find out for sure.
Build one of each and a halfway house and compare all three to find which you prefer.
Then incorporate your preference inside the Cambridge casing.
two extremes in assembling chipamps are Peter's Daniel and Carlos FM.
There are a whole range in between.
Read both and I think you may come a conclusion that your TDLs need something more towards Carlos FM solution rather than the Daniel type which use no smoothing caps at the rectifiers.
But, there are three ways to find out for sure.
Build one of each and a halfway house and compare all three to find which you prefer.
Then incorporate your preference inside the Cambridge casing.
I just realized that the PSU I first looked at is the Carlos FM design. To properly utillise this PSU I would require a new TX, This is fine as I also want to build a dedicated supply for the preamp stage using a new Trafo and discrete regulators.
Where could I find a suitable Transformer for the snubberized PSU?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.