An amp a little bit over 100W/channel is what most people would think is the sweet spot, is the new 686 a little bit overkill? If the price will be very close north of 150$ as you said in the email then I think I will not eat at Bob Chinn's Crab house( my family favorite restaurant in Wheeling Illinois) for a couple of weeks ...
Asuslover,
The difference between 65w/8 ohms and 100w/8 ohms is a whoppingly small 1.87 dB. The Mod286 ( in mono configuration ) is 65w/8 ohms but you’ll need 2 boards for stereo and as such you might as well go for the 686!
The Mod686 definitely has a niche here given how well NCORE, ICE & Pascal have done.
Good engineering shouldn’t be cheap and I think the cost is commensurate with the extreme performance Christiansen’s circuits provide.
The choice of where you believe you need to eat is rather irrelevant. But Happy Holidays anyways...
Best,
Anand.
The difference between 65w/8 ohms and 100w/8 ohms is a whoppingly small 1.87 dB. The Mod286 ( in mono configuration ) is 65w/8 ohms but you’ll need 2 boards for stereo and as such you might as well go for the 686!
The Mod686 definitely has a niche here given how well NCORE, ICE & Pascal have done.
Good engineering shouldn’t be cheap and I think the cost is commensurate with the extreme performance Christiansen’s circuits provide.
The choice of where you believe you need to eat is rather irrelevant. But Happy Holidays anyways...
Best,
Anand.
I need this. What rail voltage?206 W into 8 Ω @ 0.0006 % THD+N verified. 350 W (4 Ω) when my lab supply hits its current limit. I expect the actual limit to be closer to 400 W.
6 x LM3886 + LME49724 + OPA1642 in a Bridge/Parallel Differential Composite Amp architecture.
Availability: Preorders by end of January 2018. Full production towards mid/late February.
Just saying...
Tom
Ok my friend,
I believe I know what is the sonic difference between 65w and 100w or even 400w, but my speakers will not be able to handle all of those 400w , not even for short time.
About the restaurant... I think you should read again to understand what I wanted to say.
Happy Holidays!
206 W into 8 Ω @ 0.0006 % THD+N verified. 350 W (4 Ω) when my lab supply hits its current limit. I expect the actual limit to be closer to 400 W.
6 x LM3886 + LME49724 + OPA1642 in a Bridge/Parallel Differential Composite Amp architecture.
Availability: Preorders by end of January 2018. Full production towards mid/late February.
Just saying...
Tom[/QUOTE
Will it play nice with a dip down to 2ohms?
Provided the heat sinks are large enough, yes.
Many want 100+ W. I don't have anything currently that'll do that into 8 Ω. If 200 W is too much for you, just assemble the MOD686 with four LM3886es and run it on ±28 V. That'll give you somewhere around 140-150 W into 8 Ω.
Alternatively, you could play specmanship and call the 200 W version a 100 W amp with 3 dB of headroom...
Foregoing steak and lobster dinner for a few weeks will be well worth it, I think.
Exactly. So why are so many locked in on 100+ (but not too much +) W? It's marketing and perceptions. For decades people have been told that they need 100+ W.
±35 V. A regulated ±36 V would work too. There are some SMPSes available in that space.
Should be no problem.
Tom
I will definitely offer a partially assembled (SMD populated) option and a fully assembled module. I am considering dropping the bare PCB option except for maybe a few spares or pre-orders. The module option will be mounted on an aluminum bracket. Just bolt the bracket directly to the heat sink with a thin coat of thermal grease and you're good to go.
While many are quite comfortable soldering the SMD components, they are more difficult to solder than thru-hole parts. I'm seeing roughly 10x the number of help requests on the MOD286 than I do on the MOD86, for example. On top of that, the assembly issues are more difficult to resolve via email in an SMD build than in a thru-hole build. While I do enjoy helping people with their builds, I do need to spend more time growing my company than I spend answering email.
The more exciting parts are now only available in SMD, so there's no way around it. We'll just have to roll with it. Unfortunately that means paying someone to assemble the SMD components for us. At least I've found a local company, which does excellent work and specializes in small production runs. They're quite reasonably priced, in particular as they have to pay the prevailing Western wages, but they don't work for free, of course.
I will have the two output inductors available as a separate product as well. I had a bunch of them custom wound. That'll be a nice add for the LM3886DR, MOD286, and MOD686 builders. Unfortunately, that inductor does not work with the MOD86.
Tom
While many are quite comfortable soldering the SMD components, they are more difficult to solder than thru-hole parts. I'm seeing roughly 10x the number of help requests on the MOD286 than I do on the MOD86, for example. On top of that, the assembly issues are more difficult to resolve via email in an SMD build than in a thru-hole build. While I do enjoy helping people with their builds, I do need to spend more time growing my company than I spend answering email.
The more exciting parts are now only available in SMD, so there's no way around it. We'll just have to roll with it. Unfortunately that means paying someone to assemble the SMD components for us. At least I've found a local company, which does excellent work and specializes in small production runs. They're quite reasonably priced, in particular as they have to pay the prevailing Western wages, but they don't work for free, of course.
I will have the two output inductors available as a separate product as well. I had a bunch of them custom wound. That'll be a nice add for the LM3886DR, MOD286, and MOD686 builders. Unfortunately, that inductor does not work with the MOD86.
Tom
New amplifier sound very exciting!
Not a lot of options in the 100+W area of amps(DIY and commercial) at the MOD686 level of performance!
Even if you can solder them well SMD are really easy to misplace, you drop one piece and ooops just like that its gone, and ordering 2x SMD BOM is not a smart strategy IMO.
Still glad to see partially assembled option since some of us just love to DIY as much we can
.
New amplifier sound very exciting!
Not a lot of options in the 100+W area of amps(DIY and commercial) at the MOD686 level of performance!
Even if you can solder them well SMD are really easy to misplace, you drop one piece and ooops just like that its gone, and ordering 2x SMD BOM is not a smart strategy IMO.
Still glad to see partially assembled option since some of us just love to DIY as much we can
+1.
I do like SMD, but it takes more time & patience. There is a thrill factor that cannot be replaced especially when your SMD build works for the 1st time!
Lots of lighting, a loupe, and flux!
Best,
Anand.
Jeff Rowland uses six LM3886es in parallel. That'll provide a maximum of 60 W into 8 Ω on a ±35 V supply. If you use a regulated supply and run it right at the ±42 V limit, you might be able to squeeze out 80-90 W into 8 Ω. The nice thing about that topology is its current capability. It's practically an audiophile welding machine.
Rowland also does not use a composite topology that I can tell, so he's stuck at the normal LM3886 performance level. His amp will show slightly lower THD than the typical 8 Ω numbers for the LM3886 as each LM3886 delivers one sixth the current, but he won't be getting as many zeros on the THD numbers as I do, especially at 20 kHz.
The fact that Rowland uses six LM3886es in his design does not make his design a Modulus-686 ... and vice versa.
Tom
Rowland also does not use a composite topology that I can tell, so he's stuck at the normal LM3886 performance level. His amp will show slightly lower THD than the typical 8 Ω numbers for the LM3886 as each LM3886 delivers one sixth the current, but he won't be getting as many zeros on the THD numbers as I do, especially at 20 kHz.
The fact that Rowland uses six LM3886es in his design does not make his design a Modulus-686 ... and vice versa.
Tom
At least from a casual glance, I'd say it probably would. On my Taming the LM3886 - Thermal Design, I detail two procedures for estimating the thermal resistance of a heat sink.
Respectfully: 150 W into 4 Ω. Only 90 W into 8 Ω (says Stereophile). I'm talking about the Rowland Model 2 (finally dug up the official name). That seems to be the one that shows when you run a Google image search for "Rowland LM3886". The images show orange shorting bars connecting all the outputs together. The bars run all the way along all the channels, so I suspect it's six LM3886es in parallel. That's also backed up by the 90 W power figure.
It is possible that he had another amp that ran the six LM3886es in a bridge/parallel, though. In my view, that's a better use for six LM3886es.
Tom