Peter Daniel said:I'm not sure what some of you mean by those comments, but Pavel's board reminds me very much of a board I made 10 years ago. It was very precise and without any exotic components
I think Peranders comment was a joke very much based on the criticizing the 47Labs amp got here.
Carlos
cost of parts?
Hi guys,
I'm a newbie on this so bear with me if this is obvious.
Can somebody give a ball park estimate on component cost for this design? I eventually plan on building 2 channels. Would this be suitable for a newbie or would BrianGT set be more suitable. Since this is my first attempt it must be easy but also safe for use...
Cheers,
Exipnos
Hi guys,
I'm a newbie on this so bear with me if this is obvious.
Can somebody give a ball park estimate on component cost for this design? I eventually plan on building 2 channels. Would this be suitable for a newbie or would BrianGT set be more suitable. Since this is my first attempt it must be easy but also safe for use...
Cheers,
Exipnos
I don´t wanna be a party-pooper but that amp is the front-end of (for example) an Aleph3 with a basic VAS-stage and a basic push-pull output stage.
I don´t wanna say that basic is bad but looking at the schematic
I basically see Nelson´s frontend and rest is standard so a little more respect please
To joends : I respect Mr. Pass sincerelly, 'cos we must to respect all apostles and he is an apostle of simplicity . Nevertheles exist question, why do that bloody constructers in chip factory's so complicated 
and why I hear distortion of his progucts. Maybe it is because, that an apostle is lower rank than The God, which only know to built distortioless amp ( and Bruce Candy too 
). I was joke, Nelson, nothing ill, I realy respect you .
. Nevertheles exist question, why do that bloody constructers in chip factory's so complicated and why I hear distortion of his progucts. Maybe it is because, that an apostle is lower rank than The God, which only know to built distortioless amp ( and Bruce Candy too ). I was joke, Nelson, nothing ill, I realy respect you .
I also would rather like a standard source follower as output stage which at least theoretically would feel more comfortable but I just have to try for myself and put an Aleph together.
Ciuffolis follower certainly is the nicest thing I´ve heard so far which shouldn´t be too far from your modified follower.
OK, enough interruption from myself.
joensd,
I am very sorry but Pavel Dudek and me speak about this "conventional" as you said class A output stage:
http://www.pha.inecnet.cz/macura/next.htm
The source follower is discontinued in support by me (mentioned on my web), as I do not want to mismatch simple projects /limited sound quality/ with those that I consider to reach very high quality. Listenning tests are done on regular basis.
I am very sorry but Pavel Dudek and me speak about this "conventional" as you said class A output stage:
http://www.pha.inecnet.cz/macura/next.htm
The source follower is discontinued in support by me (mentioned on my web), as I do not want to mismatch simple projects /limited sound quality/ with those that I consider to reach very high quality. Listenning tests are done on regular basis.
In fact, it must be rubbish. 
soundNERD, if you care to read a couple of posts back, you can see what I really think.
The statement you didn't understand was just something that I hear rather often and many people really believe in it, I don't.
It isn't the number of parts that makes the final result. It's how parts are and how they are put together.
The statement you didn't understand was just something that I hear rather often and many people really believe in it, I don't.
It isn't the number of parts that makes the final result. It's how parts are and how they are put together.
