Hi,
OT or not, this is utter audiophile nonsense really.
On one hand one advocates local NFB but when a topology has it actually built in it is being dismissed. Really?
A well designed CF and an equally well designed PS will only have the sonic fingerprint equal to the sum of sins of the passive parts used.
Any of these parts, including the valve used, will have more impact on the sound than the mere topology used here.
Ciao,
OT or not, this is utter audiophile nonsense really.
On one hand one advocates local NFB but when a topology has it actually built in it is being dismissed. Really?
A well designed CF and an equally well designed PS will only have the sonic fingerprint equal to the sum of sins of the passive parts used.
Any of these parts, including the valve used, will have more impact on the sound than the mere topology used here.
Ciao,
Hi,
OT or not, this is utter audiophile nonsense really.
On one hand one advocates local NFB but when a topology has it actually built in it is being dismissed. Really?
A well designed CF and an equally well designed PS will only have the sonic fingerprint equal to the sum of sins of the passive parts used.
Any of these parts, including the valve used, will have more impact on the sound than the mere topology used here.
Ciao,
I never said i like feedback - but i said that that global feedback for me is a big nono, while local can be OK. (I still perfer without as much as possible).
But still - what i think about cathode followers is that they sound dull - end of story. Also, "well designed CF" can you tell me what that is - it really isn't that many ways of doing it?
I like FET-based CCS, and usually build with good PSU, often with Common mode chokes and everything - but i still haven't heard a cathode follower i like, not that i have searched that much though. I know i'm not alone on this one - but we are all different.
There is one good way to design a CF: use load lines as for a common cathode stage, assuming adequate supply rail voltages and a suitable valve choice.RollE2k said:
There are several ways to design a bad CF. Examples are:
- choose an unsuitable valve
- choose far too small a supply rail voltage
- choose an inappropriate bias point
Some so-called 'tube buffers' manage to combine several of these mistakes.
Hi,
There are at least a dozen ways to do it the right way.
I've presented more than one CF on this forum that did everything it was supposed to do and did not sound at all as you describe.
By well designed I mean as sonically transparent as can be. No stage does not add or distract anything from the signal.
I do not think that's possible but you can come pretty close and add some benefit in the process. No more or less than any other stage really.
I've seen lots of tricks to avoid the use of CFs where there should have been one in the first place because of this bad rep of the CF in audiophile circles.
While everything is a compromise, I'd rather not do without the bashed CF.
Ciao,
There are at least a dozen ways to do it the right way.
I've presented more than one CF on this forum that did everything it was supposed to do and did not sound at all as you describe.
By well designed I mean as sonically transparent as can be. No stage does not add or distract anything from the signal.
I do not think that's possible but you can come pretty close and add some benefit in the process. No more or less than any other stage really.
I've seen lots of tricks to avoid the use of CFs where there should have been one in the first place because of this bad rep of the CF in audiophile circles.
While everything is a compromise, I'd rather not do without the bashed CF.
Ciao,
I also ordered a bunch of new caps to try out (6pcs)
Thx to DF96 I'm also gonna replace C5. So in front of the KT88 i choose 0,1uF instead of now 0,47uF and the C5 staying at 0,22uF.
All caps are gonna be Audyn True Copper replacing Audyn Reference and Clarity Cap ESA.
Ordered from here: They have nice prices on these caps and good service (answer emails fast)
Audiophonics - DIY Cables, Amplifiers and Accessories
Thx to DF96 I'm also gonna replace C5. So in front of the KT88 i choose 0,1uF instead of now 0,47uF and the C5 staying at 0,22uF.
All caps are gonna be Audyn True Copper replacing Audyn Reference and Clarity Cap ESA.
Ordered from here: They have nice prices on these caps and good service (answer emails fast)
Audiophonics - DIY Cables, Amplifiers and Accessories
Attachments
I got my new quad of KT88s and one thing is sure, no more chinese tubes
Needed to re-bias them, direct swap with Shuguang my meter showed 0,77V, little to high? I turned all down to 0,55V to be on the safe side.
Somebody with experience here how much i can bias these to without sacrifice lifespan to much?
They have a very neutral, open, engaging with a midrange that is "magical" to my ears. Brings me back to my old Audax PR170MO soundwise in the midrange
Genalex Reissue KT88: What a joy
Needed to re-bias them, direct swap with Shuguang my meter showed 0,77V, little to high? I turned all down to 0,55V to be on the safe side.
Somebody with experience here how much i can bias these to without sacrifice lifespan to much?
They have a very neutral, open, engaging with a midrange that is "magical" to my ears. Brings me back to my old Audax PR170MO soundwise in the midrange
Genalex Reissue KT88: What a joy
Last edited:
LL1679 is avalible in PP or SE configuration - and then wiring depends on what speaker impedance you want to run.
They can be wired for 4,8,16ohm - but everything depends on what current you run (what tube impedance will be).
These transformers are made for KT88 / 6550-tubes, so they should be perfect match.
I haven't tried them myself - but have used many of lundahl small-signal transformers, and quality is top notch.
datasheet is here - http://www.lundahl.se/pdf/1679.pdf
They can be wired for 4,8,16ohm - but everything depends on what current you run (what tube impedance will be).
These transformers are made for KT88 / 6550-tubes, so they should be perfect match.
I haven't tried them myself - but have used many of lundahl small-signal transformers, and quality is top notch.
datasheet is here - http://www.lundahl.se/pdf/1679.pdf
Yeah but hey it's not all at "once". 450e is a step up from a couple of 28e caps also a whole lot easier to explain to my wife
No but for me it's a lot at the moment. Have to feed my daughter too
SD-1? Link? You've designed them or? Actually have a long relation to them, started back in the late 80's, early 90's... Like the movie; There's something about (Mary) Audax
also a whole lot easier to explain to my wife No but for me it's a lot at the moment. Have to feed my daughter too
SD-1? Link? You've designed them or? Actually have a long relation to them, started back in the late 80's, early 90's... Like the movie; There's something about (Mary) Audax
Last edited:
Hi,
Just pulling your leg for the umpteenth time.
Must be about that era.
Search for SD Acoustics/ Steen Doessing an you'll probably find something in the archives. Great speaker designer with plenty of innovative ideas.
Best,
I found some info about these speakers. Also found schematics for xover n realized i created something very similar with this midrange OB. I used beyma cp21 and later 18sound compression driver n waveguide together with 18sounds 15LW1401 subs, 2x per side. This with some 3000w rms
My neighbours didn't like it as much as me so it had to go
Sorry for OT
Last edited:
Got my caps today and after 10-15min they were playing music in the yaqin
Recently tried Rike S-cap in my pre with outstanding results i still decided to try audyn true copper (yes they are heavy) and can say they are same class as Rike just a bit fuller/warmer. Details are on top with mundorf SIO too without without losing the "important soul n heart"..
Compared to my old favourite Audyn reference they are a bit more "airy" and detailed.
Recently tried Rike S-cap in my pre with outstanding results i still decided to try audyn true copper (yes they are heavy) and can say they are same class as Rike just a bit fuller/warmer. Details are on top with mundorf SIO too without without losing the "important soul n heart"..
Compared to my old favourite Audyn reference they are a bit more "airy" and detailed.
Attachments
Hi,
In the OBS2 (Open Baffle System) the Audax midrange unit is great as it has a rather stiff suspension.
It was a well balanced speaker, floor standing, 3 way with a bass reflex loaded woofer coupled to the OB midrange and a Visaton ribbon speaker for the highs.
The designer was a drummer and you could tell as his speakers were really fast.
Anyway, glad you like the Audax too.
I'm a big fan of OTL amps and ribbon midrange and highs and...full range minis. Most speakers are just awfully slow.
Ciao,
In the OBS2 (Open Baffle System) the Audax midrange unit is great as it has a rather stiff suspension.
It was a well balanced speaker, floor standing, 3 way with a bass reflex loaded woofer coupled to the OB midrange and a Visaton ribbon speaker for the highs.
The designer was a drummer and you could tell as his speakers were really fast.
Anyway, glad you like the Audax too.
I'm a big fan of OTL amps and ribbon midrange and highs and...full range minis. Most speakers are just awfully slow.
Ciao,
SB acoustics i have now is the 'first' fast normal speakers i heard. Built them 3yrs ago n still going strong. Tried some other drivers (ribbons) but the "dimple" dome is really good. Sometimes my brain wonders away on to try those audax and the even better PHLs but i guess the SB17RNX must be doing something right
But ofcourse one part i want really bad; the high effiency compared to my Sb's.
But ofcourse one part i want really bad; the high effiency compared to my Sb's.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.