I would prefer to have it all on one board. It should be less expensive, plus it will make for a neater layout.
Also, can somebody direct me to a parts list for building this or post one on this thread?
Thanks, Daniel
BOM is here Post#659
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/174468-very-best-amplifier-i-have-ever-heard-66.html
but pls check and spare the next victim.
The new board look nice but the mounting of the outputs worries me. I have had a project : the superlieach clone TO-264; and mounting like that is no fun. As for the cost, the new board will not cost too much less for at that quantity, the fixed cost had lesser significance on the price / board, the quantity does and so the price... I had call for a quote, should know that by next Mon.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/174468-very-best-amplifier-i-have-ever-heard-66.html
but pls check and spare the next victim.
The new board look nice but the mounting of the outputs worries me. I have had a project : the superlieach clone TO-264; and mounting like that is no fun. As for the cost, the new board will not cost too much less for at that quantity, the fixed cost had lesser significance on the price / board, the quantity does and so the price... I had call for a quote, should know that by next Mon.
Hi buyers,
two things to confirm :
1. Some guys may be still confused with the # of boards ordered. I count your order by pair, not by pcs and so is the quote. If there is any mistake (who ever is making) please E&OE. Kindly send your admenment here. My mail box is messy enough for me, don't make me misread again, tks.
2. Would anyone disagree to go with the new board (looks nice to me except I am worried about the mounting) ? If you like the old one, please declare here (in this thread, not to my email add.). If there is a 20% vs 80%, we will go with the 80%. If there is 40-60, we can split up to 2 groups. I hope you guys think that is fair enough. As long as Alex can hand me both sets of gerbers, I can go ahead with no problem with 2 orders. Bookkeeping is tedious but OK for me.
Any technical or design question please refer to, or raise in, this thread or the one that Nagys started, NOT to my email add. I am just the bookkeeper not the designer nor adviser. (not good enough to be anyway). Even if I can answer (you might be lucky enough to hit a question I can answer), won't it be nice that some else can read it also instead of asking it again and again?
Krzysztof, you are the only one that is missing from my billing list cause I do not have your paypal a/c.
Last thing.
Before I send invoice to your paypal a/c, I will send a performa to your email add. first (the one in paypal a/c). Please call back only if there is a mistake and send it here, not to my email address.
Hope you guys read this message carefully.
two things to confirm :
1. Some guys may be still confused with the # of boards ordered. I count your order by pair, not by pcs and so is the quote. If there is any mistake (who ever is making) please E&OE. Kindly send your admenment here. My mail box is messy enough for me, don't make me misread again, tks.
2. Would anyone disagree to go with the new board (looks nice to me except I am worried about the mounting) ? If you like the old one, please declare here (in this thread, not to my email add.). If there is a 20% vs 80%, we will go with the 80%. If there is 40-60, we can split up to 2 groups. I hope you guys think that is fair enough. As long as Alex can hand me both sets of gerbers, I can go ahead with no problem with 2 orders. Bookkeeping is tedious but OK for me.
Any technical or design question please refer to, or raise in, this thread or the one that Nagys started, NOT to my email add. I am just the bookkeeper not the designer nor adviser. (not good enough to be anyway). Even if I can answer (you might be lucky enough to hit a question I can answer), won't it be nice that some else can read it also instead of asking it again and again?
Krzysztof, you are the only one that is missing from my billing list cause I do not have your paypal a/c.
Last thing.
Before I send invoice to your paypal a/c, I will send a performa to your email add. first (the one in paypal a/c). Please call back only if there is a mistake and send it here, not to my email address.
Hope you guys read this message carefully.
Bigpanda - As far as I can see in Alex's new layout, the transistors are drawn in a way that when they are mounted, they'll be between the circuit board and the heatsink, correct? With the circuit board being mounted on the heatsink itself? But I don't think that you need to mount them exactly like in the picture. The only acceptable way to mount the transistors for me is like in the picture below, anything else would be a deal breaker:
I also asked Alex if he could make a few changes. Having a single circuit board would be really nice. Here's what I asked him to change:
Alex, the board is looking good! I see you have provided two different places for the speaker output, one protected and one not protected, I like that. I'm assuming that most builders will use the protected output. In addition to the series inductor, can you also please locate the output Zobel next to it? They really should be together in the same place. If possible, can you please update the following few things?
1.) Is there any way that you can make the tracks for the 60VAC larger? Especially the points where the power supply connects to?
2.) Can you make it so that the original parts, BD249C/BD250C will also fit?
3.) The fuses should be between the 100uF and 10,000uF capacitors.
4.) Any way to run the -80VDC to the protection circuit, the other way? Maybe first going down and around the circuit board. I don't know if it's good to run it straight across the input stage circuit and right over the negative feedback trace.
5.) And lastly, can you please make the +/-80VDC connection points next to each other (so they're not on the opposite sides of the board) and closer to the bottom, where the 60VAC connection is? This way, power supply wires wont have to be run to different sides of the board and right over the circuit.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I also asked Alex if he could make a few changes. Having a single circuit board would be really nice. Here's what I asked him to change:
Alex, the board is looking good! I see you have provided two different places for the speaker output, one protected and one not protected, I like that. I'm assuming that most builders will use the protected output. In addition to the series inductor, can you also please locate the output Zobel next to it? They really should be together in the same place. If possible, can you please update the following few things?
1.) Is there any way that you can make the tracks for the 60VAC larger? Especially the points where the power supply connects to?
2.) Can you make it so that the original parts, BD249C/BD250C will also fit?
3.) The fuses should be between the 100uF and 10,000uF capacitors.
4.) Any way to run the -80VDC to the protection circuit, the other way? Maybe first going down and around the circuit board. I don't know if it's good to run it straight across the input stage circuit and right over the negative feedback trace.
5.) And lastly, can you please make the +/-80VDC connection points next to each other (so they're not on the opposite sides of the board) and closer to the bottom, where the 60VAC connection is? This way, power supply wires wont have to be run to different sides of the board and right over the circuit.
Hi Nagys,
Still remember the discussion on the top and bottom resist? Do you think they can print the silkscreen on the top easily without the top resist layer?? I had hit the 100 mark. All I need is alex's files and I am ready as usual.
Group buyers please check this thread for regular updates of status.
Still remember the discussion on the top and bottom resist? Do you think they can print the silkscreen on the top easily without the top resist layer?? I had hit the 100 mark. All I need is alex's files and I am ready as usual.
Group buyers please check this thread for regular updates of status.
Bigpanda - I don't think they can easily print the silk screen directly on the tin plated top. At least I've never seen it done before. But it shouldn't be that big of a problem. All the builders have the original schematic, BOM, and they can look at Alex's pictures that have all the components shown. We have to wait until Alex makes all those changes, because as is, the single board is not ready for prime time yet.
Tyimo - Yes, you can only have a single pair of outputs if you choose to. Remember, the input stage will still need 40VAC. I'm not exactly sure how much voltage the output stage will need. I'm guessing you can leave +/- 60VDC. Goldmund does not describe a single pair version of the amplifier in their service notes. This is something you'll have to experiment. But one problem could be this: If you decide to feed the single pair of MOSFETS with less than +/-60VDC, you'll most likely need a separate transformer for the input stage and the output stage. Is there any reason why 2 pairs is too much for you? 2 pairs will give you a very standard 100 watt amplifier.
Tyimo - Yes, you can only have a single pair of outputs if you choose to. Remember, the input stage will still need 40VAC. I'm not exactly sure how much voltage the output stage will need. I'm guessing you can leave +/- 60VDC. Goldmund does not describe a single pair version of the amplifier in their service notes. This is something you'll have to experiment. But one problem could be this: If you decide to feed the single pair of MOSFETS with less than +/-60VDC, you'll most likely need a separate transformer for the input stage and the output stage. Is there any reason why 2 pairs is too much for you? 2 pairs will give you a very standard 100 watt amplifier.
You'll have to calculate it out yourself, that's too much work. I would recommend not building it using 4 pairs of outputs not to change the original schematic. Just use 3 pairs and do not install the 4th pair. People who want to use the 4th pair will have to experiment themselves and see what results they get.
Bigpanda - I just saw Alex's recent changes and the board looks very, very good. I suggested him a few more minor changes and I think it'll be ready for the group buy.
Yes, I think we should do the single board with the protection circuit already on it, makes for a much cleaner looking amplifier.
Yes, I think we should do the single board with the protection circuit already on it, makes for a much cleaner looking amplifier.
Yes I would like one pair of the single board.
Does the new single board fit new relay?
Brad
The new board does not fit the relay I spec'd originally. It fits a variety of other standard relays like these: Your Search Results | Newark.com
If you guys want to use the original relay that Goldmund and I spec'd, I can ask Alex to change it. But at this point, I personally no longer care what relay it uses. They're all similar more, or less. I just want to get the PCBs already.
What does everyone think?
If you guys want to use the original relay that Goldmund and I spec'd, I can ask Alex to change it. But at this point, I personally no longer care what relay it uses. They're all similar more, or less. I just want to get the PCBs already.
What does everyone think?
The one in Alex's latest PCB layout is also a standard relay and also readily available everywhere. Please see the link I posted, tons of relays are available and those are just Panasnics, I didn't include Omron, Tyco, etc.
The only reason to stick with my initial choice of relay is because that's what Goldmund spec'd. Other than that, it virtually makes no difference.
The only reason to stick with my initial choice of relay is because that's what Goldmund spec'd. Other than that, it virtually makes no difference.
Hi guys,
Maybe I did not make it too clear but it is like this :
If you want to have the new design (1 board for everything) which is the default now, you don't have to declare. If you might want the old design (2 seperate boards ), confirm that in this thread. Because when they first order, they were looking at the old design and like it, not something else.
Hi Nagys,
What you are suggesting is to forget the components silkscreen completely which doesn't seem to be a good idea IMO. Do we have to vote on this?
Maybe I did not make it too clear but it is like this :
If you want to have the new design (1 board for everything) which is the default now, you don't have to declare. If you might want the old design (2 seperate boards ), confirm that in this thread. Because when they first order, they were looking at the old design and like it, not something else.
Hi Nagys,
What you are suggesting is to forget the components silkscreen completely which doesn't seem to be a good idea IMO. Do we have to vote on this?
