An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Build number 6. better matched than any of the others, virtually no swing on the servo and this one has pressure connectors used for all the loading and RIAA components so you can swap them as you see fit. I've been using them on my own personal build for the loading resistors and heard nor found any untoward effects. They make life easy for tweaking and adjusting.
More.
IMG_1030 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Build number 6. better matched than any of the others, virtually no swing on the servo and this one has pressure connectors used for all the loading and RIAA components so you can swap them as you see fit. I've been using them on my own personal build for the loading resistors and heard nor found any untoward effects. They make life easy for tweaking and adjusting.
More.
IMG_1030 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Great!!!
Check Ruschkowski's / Borbely's new phono stage in Linear Audio 6, this is stuff that Joachim has been doing a couple years back (remember the "Starless" phono stage on MPP?). I am not sure it is the same but it sure smells like it.....
That is pretty good idea going to do same on my second one
In the mean time I have started to re measure my transistor batches
I have a few hundreds BC327-40 from Fairchild direct whit Hfe above 560 and up to 600 (al measurement taken with hesener circuit at 5.00V)
Any one interested in swap with similar Hfe BC337-40
Simon let me know if you want them I can send you enough PNP (matched Hfe around 600) for the Input stage
Attachments
Last edited:
Hi there,
sitting here with allmost stuffed Calvins...
Only those J107/PF5102 are left to be stuffed.
Fisrst idea was to compare circuit schema with
the boards. This makes me mad because some
of the values mentionend in the schema appear
to be different on the actual boards.
Therefore i got that nervous to be not able to
pinpoint where to drop them.
Help me please.
sitting here with allmost stuffed Calvins...
Only those J107/PF5102 are left to be stuffed.
Fisrst idea was to compare circuit schema with
the boards. This makes me mad because some
of the values mentionend in the schema appear
to be different on the actual boards.
Therefore i got that nervous to be not able to
pinpoint where to drop them.
Help me please.
Hi,
Don't panic (in Paradise), I am in the same mood ...
If we pray both to Alfred .... it's help.
Karel
Thought to be not the only stupid out there....
Right you are, you're not the only one
Took me just over an hour with parts from my drawers. Worked immediately with zero issues. Soundwise - a teeny improvement over the original, but still, definitely an improvement. I see a bright future for this board in other projects.
Thanks to Calvin, Hesener and everyone who made the board available.
Attachments
Hi analog sa
You have a small thing not right. See Alfreds list:
Paradise documents are here: Link list
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/report.php?p=3685055
The resistor R 15 (100k) is optional when used as a buffer for Parsadise
it should be NOT inseresd.
You will see it's sounds much better without R 15.
Take it easy
Werner
Hi Peter
Trying to help you with this photo.
javascript:;
When you zoom in you see 2 trannies with twisted Pins.
There I have fitted befor 2sk170 and that is the place for
the PF 5102. Now I have PF5102 sitting there as well
Take it easy
Werner
Last edited:
Once again
I hope you can see it here better.
Right-hand side is't the right one. Left-hand side is't the one behind.
http://javascript<b></b>:;
I hope you can see it here better.
Right-hand side is't the right one. Left-hand side is't the one behind.
http://javascript<b></b>:;
Last edited:
Hi,
Omittance of R15 is in fact not an option here but a must, as it´d be parallel with R9a,b which is part of the RIAA-equalizer network.
As R9a,b are 73k5, R15=100k would modify the amplitude response considerably, as the combined value of R9a,b and R15 woukld be 42k36.
The reasons for R15 are twofold. One is to define the input impedance and the second is to supply for a bias current path for the input JFET.
R15 may only be omitted within circuits, where a bias path -like R9a,b in the Paradise- exists. It´s value may be chosen anywhere below 1Meg.
jauu
Calvin
Just wondered about the claimed sonic differences without R15 and had a look at the Paradise schem.
Omittance of R15 is in fact not an option here but a must, as it´d be parallel with R9a,b which is part of the RIAA-equalizer network.
As R9a,b are 73k5, R15=100k would modify the amplitude response considerably, as the combined value of R9a,b and R15 woukld be 42k36.
The reasons for R15 are twofold. One is to define the input impedance and the second is to supply for a bias current path for the input JFET.
R15 may only be omitted within circuits, where a bias path -like R9a,b in the Paradise- exists. It´s value may be chosen anywhere below 1Meg.
jauu
Calvin
You are certainly right - it modifies the riaa if inserted
Thanks!
Edit: Just noticed that Calvin has already explained.
Last edited: