Thanks to everyone - its been an interesting read.
I'm a bit dissapointed with the schematic - with twin triodes per channel, Yaqin could have used a Cathode follower with a current source.
John Broskie's stuff on an Aikido and White Cathode Followers is a good read.
More cathode follower stuff
My sonic findings with the Yaqin CD3 is that its quite transparent.
The coupling caps seem to have as much sonic impact as the tubes used.
After trying a few coupling caps
For the input coupling Cap - I'm staying with the original Audience AuriCap 1uF @ 200 Vdc
For the Output Coupling Cap - Mundorf M-Cap Supreme 1uF 680 Vdc.
Tubes - Shuguang Treasure CV-181z's
Don't think anyone has said it here, but film Caps used for Coupling,
should have the outside of the foil connected to the low impedance side on the circuit.
The reason being is that the outside of the foil acts as a shield for the rest of the cap.
So in other words, for the input coupling cap, the inside of the foil should be connected to the grid.
For the output coupling cap, the outside of the foil should be connected to the cathode.
.
I'm a bit dissapointed with the schematic - with twin triodes per channel, Yaqin could have used a Cathode follower with a current source.
John Broskie's stuff on an Aikido and White Cathode Followers is a good read.
More cathode follower stuff
My sonic findings with the Yaqin CD3 is that its quite transparent.
The coupling caps seem to have as much sonic impact as the tubes used.
After trying a few coupling caps
For the input coupling Cap - I'm staying with the original Audience AuriCap 1uF @ 200 Vdc
For the Output Coupling Cap - Mundorf M-Cap Supreme 1uF 680 Vdc.
Tubes - Shuguang Treasure CV-181z's
Don't think anyone has said it here, but film Caps used for Coupling,
should have the outside of the foil connected to the low impedance side on the circuit.
The reason being is that the outside of the foil acts as a shield for the rest of the cap.
So in other words, for the input coupling cap, the inside of the foil should be connected to the grid.
For the output coupling cap, the outside of the foil should be connected to the cathode.
.
Last edited:
Tube rolling?
Is there a problem? Or you are convinced there is something MORE yet in terms of sound? I SAW [today] that you HAD upgraded your caps, but did you bypass them with smaller caps too? And the PSU caps as well? And in the PSU you CAN sometimes add photo_flash caps if they are rated high enough. Tubes-wise, I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, I think the 6SN7 family is the direct replacement, though one person in this thread used the even older 6F8G [I think it was]. So I think what you are asking is what the best tubes to cram in are, and for people to pipe on on what their fav BRAND of say the 6SN7, is, and what nuances they have appreciated? Threads like that abound, I am guilty of tube-rolling myself. I'm the wrong one to ask which 6SN7 is best, though typically the more costly are the more rare and sought after, I didn't say you could hear any difference.
I will digress for a moment and say that the best cap IMHO is no cap... only 1/2 kidding. If this buffer feeds yet another device in the chain, and THAT device HAS input caps... then you are placing buffer output cap in series with more input caps. I have fun with that and short the caps in the buffer output then, and rely on the caps in the next device and update [and "bypass"] THOSE [with smaller caps in parallel]. If you are feeding this CD3 with a DAC, does THAT have output caps in series too? You MAY be able to short those as well, or replace with wire, or make a shorting switch. For instance, I sometimes use a CS4398, I take 1/2 raw DAC audio per leg straight to the tube buffer cap. [because my Broskie Unbalancer is not done]. From there I short my BBE processor's input caps with a DPDT switch, and rely on the caps in the tube buffer ONLY, so right here I've eliminated 2 caps in the path [times 2 for stereo]. [In the DAC output] I DO tend to leave some small series R and some low value cap to ground like .001uF or even 500pF. Getting RID of 2 series CAPS or MORE, per channel, I think you would hear more change than tube-rolling but that is just a guess. I have simulated this numerous times with 30Ga silver-plated wire-wrap wire to high grade switch across the caps, flip back and forth and I bet you leave them shorted [bypassed with wire]. I guess I do not know if you ARE using a DAC, I just assume. The "gain" of this buffer is by nature "1" or less, so flipping to higher gain tubes, probably just takes you further from the design spec of this buffer electrically; you would not HAVE more net gain. 6SN7 is pretty much same as what you HAVE, maybe maybe MAYBE you would hear some better quality with a vintage pair of whatever [like I am convinced you might hear something you like from 7193 tubes]. You could easily spend 1/2 what the buffer cost you on "fresh" vintage tubes. [new tweeters or some tubes??] Shorting a few caps is free. Bypassing your recap job with caps say 1/10th the values in parallel with the main ones might help. [caps that small are somewhat economical but watch your B+ ratings]. SO, if you have no "problem" with the buffer...I have suggested some other things that are FUN and have worked for me.
I mentioned the BBE, I have used them for years... mine probably has the input *and* output caps shorted [since prior and next stages of the system-chain HAVE decent caps in the way].
I found photoflash caps for my CD2 [not 3] at I think it was Allelectronics, hard telling whether they helped, it's been 6-8 Mo.
Is there a problem? Or you are convinced there is something MORE yet in terms of sound? I SAW [today] that you HAD upgraded your caps, but did you bypass them with smaller caps too? And the PSU caps as well? And in the PSU you CAN sometimes add photo_flash caps if they are rated high enough. Tubes-wise, I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong, I think the 6SN7 family is the direct replacement, though one person in this thread used the even older 6F8G [I think it was]. So I think what you are asking is what the best tubes to cram in are, and for people to pipe on on what their fav BRAND of say the 6SN7, is, and what nuances they have appreciated? Threads like that abound, I am guilty of tube-rolling myself. I'm the wrong one to ask which 6SN7 is best, though typically the more costly are the more rare and sought after, I didn't say you could hear any difference.
I will digress for a moment and say that the best cap IMHO is no cap... only 1/2 kidding. If this buffer feeds yet another device in the chain, and THAT device HAS input caps... then you are placing buffer output cap in series with more input caps. I have fun with that and short the caps in the buffer output then, and rely on the caps in the next device and update [and "bypass"] THOSE [with smaller caps in parallel]. If you are feeding this CD3 with a DAC, does THAT have output caps in series too? You MAY be able to short those as well, or replace with wire, or make a shorting switch. For instance, I sometimes use a CS4398, I take 1/2 raw DAC audio per leg straight to the tube buffer cap. [because my Broskie Unbalancer is not done]. From there I short my BBE processor's input caps with a DPDT switch, and rely on the caps in the tube buffer ONLY, so right here I've eliminated 2 caps in the path [times 2 for stereo]. [In the DAC output] I DO tend to leave some small series R and some low value cap to ground like .001uF or even 500pF. Getting RID of 2 series CAPS or MORE, per channel, I think you would hear more change than tube-rolling but that is just a guess. I have simulated this numerous times with 30Ga silver-plated wire-wrap wire to high grade switch across the caps, flip back and forth and I bet you leave them shorted [bypassed with wire]. I guess I do not know if you ARE using a DAC, I just assume. The "gain" of this buffer is by nature "1" or less, so flipping to higher gain tubes, probably just takes you further from the design spec of this buffer electrically; you would not HAVE more net gain. 6SN7 is pretty much same as what you HAVE, maybe maybe MAYBE you would hear some better quality with a vintage pair of whatever [like I am convinced you might hear something you like from 7193 tubes]. You could easily spend 1/2 what the buffer cost you on "fresh" vintage tubes. [new tweeters or some tubes??] Shorting a few caps is free. Bypassing your recap job with caps say 1/10th the values in parallel with the main ones might help. [caps that small are somewhat economical but watch your B+ ratings]. SO, if you have no "problem" with the buffer...I have suggested some other things that are FUN and have worked for me.
I mentioned the BBE, I have used them for years... mine probably has the input *and* output caps shorted [since prior and next stages of the system-chain HAVE decent caps in the way].
I found photoflash caps for my CD2 [not 3] at I think it was Allelectronics, hard telling whether they helped, it's been 6-8 Mo.
Hi,
Because capacity is doubled you have a lower low frequency extension
so you will hear more bass which is better.singa
not necessarily true all the time......
doubling cap values
If doubling cap values were always better then we would forever be in a race to have the biggest caps. In Car stereo DC supplies I can certainly understand. But where the output Z and the actual "load" [i'm already speaking gibberish].. feeding another line level device [z might be 50K, 100K, not 8ohms], well, the caps likely to be there are in series hacking away at the value of "C" in the path... so shorting some caps... it's not the bass I hear more of it's the elusive "sound stage" and "ambience" [HAH]. But in all seriousness if you can short caps every othet stage and in the chain 2-3x you WILL hear that, I promise. I cannot say the same for $50 TUBE-SWAP IN A traditional cathode-follower buffer -- I'd be thinking Neo3PDRs first. And, I know that if you have a differential out DAC chip feeding a Broskie Unbalancer, it HAS to sound pretty good if built right. NO CAPS in the differential path from DAC to grids. After THAT any good amp operating in it's linear region should sound pretty stunning. As has been said in other ways in this thread, the CD3 MAY be a solution in search of a problem, for some of us. Improperly implemented it's just one more device in the chain - not always but often in audio "simple can be better". If you NEED GAIN it cannot give you that, if you do not need gain and Z in and Z out are already matched... it buys you nothing or little. If you start shorting caps where you CAN... things perk up. But the CD3 not in line, horror of horrors, if the sound improves, well, ebay it 8) In ANY event, just thinking about the widgets in line separately may not be the best solution. Hyper modded CD3 into a crap preamp amp setup is still not good. And what if you stuck another $100-200 in the speaker-system? This kind reminds me of the whatever platinum power cord ends sold to audiophiles to plug into the $0.99 wall outlet at end of 14Ga home store Romex. Lest I sound TOO negative, let me say that a raw out DAC to CD2 and onwards sounds stunning, I would expect not much change with CD3 since I have modded CD2 to the max. Sounds fine with no tube buffer too. I believe that the Broskie Unbalancer is the next level in DAC --> tubes--> power amp out.
If doubling cap values were always better then we would forever be in a race to have the biggest caps. In Car stereo DC supplies I can certainly understand. But where the output Z and the actual "load" [i'm already speaking gibberish].. feeding another line level device [z might be 50K, 100K, not 8ohms], well, the caps likely to be there are in series hacking away at the value of "C" in the path... so shorting some caps... it's not the bass I hear more of it's the elusive "sound stage" and "ambience" [HAH]. But in all seriousness if you can short caps every othet stage and in the chain 2-3x you WILL hear that, I promise. I cannot say the same for $50 TUBE-SWAP IN A traditional cathode-follower buffer -- I'd be thinking Neo3PDRs first. And, I know that if you have a differential out DAC chip feeding a Broskie Unbalancer, it HAS to sound pretty good if built right. NO CAPS in the differential path from DAC to grids. After THAT any good amp operating in it's linear region should sound pretty stunning. As has been said in other ways in this thread, the CD3 MAY be a solution in search of a problem, for some of us. Improperly implemented it's just one more device in the chain - not always but often in audio "simple can be better". If you NEED GAIN it cannot give you that, if you do not need gain and Z in and Z out are already matched... it buys you nothing or little. If you start shorting caps where you CAN... things perk up. But the CD3 not in line, horror of horrors, if the sound improves, well, ebay it 8) In ANY event, just thinking about the widgets in line separately may not be the best solution. Hyper modded CD3 into a crap preamp amp setup is still not good. And what if you stuck another $100-200 in the speaker-system? This kind reminds me of the whatever platinum power cord ends sold to audiophiles to plug into the $0.99 wall outlet at end of 14Ga home store Romex. Lest I sound TOO negative, let me say that a raw out DAC to CD2 and onwards sounds stunning, I would expect not much change with CD3 since I have modded CD2 to the max. Sounds fine with no tube buffer too. I believe that the Broskie Unbalancer is the next level in DAC --> tubes--> power amp out.
I'm still not certain whether I should find it sad or funny that an unnecessary trivial circuit is put in a fancy case and sold for a high price to unsuspecting people, who then have deep and serious discussions about which valve to use (in a circuit with 100% feedback) and which brand of coupling capacitor (when the correct value and dielectric means the cap has little or no effect on sound, irrespective of brand or cost).
The real issues are: do I need one at all, has the best load line and bias been chosen, and where do I want to place my LF rolloff?
The real issues are: do I need one at all, has the best load line and bias been chosen, and where do I want to place my LF rolloff?
There seems to be a lot of negativity here from some recent posts.
Yes - the schematic is dissapointing - especially, after looking at the Aikido and White Cathode followers.
However, tinkering with the Yaqin CD3 does provide inspiration to build a tube preamp.
Even a tube pre with a transformer coupled output.
The CD3 was $159 + $15 shipping.
So I'm not sure about the comment about fancy case and sold for a high price.
Clearly in some impedance situations, the Yaqin CD3 can provide impedance improvement.
Zin > 1 Meg
Zout ~ 180 ohms
Coupling caps are quite influential on the sonics.
Changing the coupling caps in the CD3 can be used to reduce resolution
and thus mask residual harshness from a digital source.
.
Yes - the schematic is dissapointing - especially, after looking at the Aikido and White Cathode followers.
However, tinkering with the Yaqin CD3 does provide inspiration to build a tube preamp.
Even a tube pre with a transformer coupled output.
The CD3 was $159 + $15 shipping.
So I'm not sure about the comment about fancy case and sold for a high price.
Clearly in some impedance situations, the Yaqin CD3 can provide impedance improvement.
Zin > 1 Meg
Zout ~ 180 ohms
Coupling caps are quite influential on the sonics.
Changing the coupling caps in the CD3 can be used to reduce resolution
and thus mask residual harshness from a digital source.
.
burned-in yet? report please......
Yes, a decent and immediate improvement, certainly worthwhile even with cheap end ClarityCap SA which I used.
Thanks Uunderhill, so looking like Shuguang Treasure CV-181z are the favourites at the moment. A bit expensive for me as I am out of work, but on my wish list
Thanks Uunderhill, so looking like Shuguang Treasure CV-181z are the favourites at the moment. A bit expensive for me as I am out of work, but on my wish list
Its was Gordon Brown, who relaxed the investment banking regulations in the Britain,
that helped create the financial mess.
When oil spiked, the over leveraged deck of cards collapsed.
Shuguang Treasure cv-181z's and Mundorf M-Cap Supremes sound very good.
Certainly, it comes to mind to build a Preamp based on these components.
I'll have to look into Lundahl preamp output transformers as well.
But these components get pricy - ouch !
.
Not entirely, a cathode follower has a lot of feedback, but depending on the mu of the triode used, it results in gains around 0.7 of the input signal voltage, but at a lower output impedance. This leaves room for some tube "flavor" to get into the sound. I've used cathode followers on various solid state devices (like CD player DAC chips) with very nice results.
CF gain around 0.9 would be more typical. Because of the high amount of feedback a CF needs to be very badly designed before it imparts any 'tube flavor'. However, badly designed CFs are not as rare as you might think. The usual trick is to use a very low supply rail voltage so the valve is running in a very curved part of its characteristic. Low rail voltage can also lead to grid current distortion, but this will be bootstrapped by the CF so not quite as bad as it might otherwise be.
Hello again.
I've replaced the original caps with these:Russian PIO Capacitor K40Y-9 0.68 uF 400V
2x 22uf and 4x 68uf, a couple of months ago, and it sound great!
Somehow the sound is much better, the bass is tighter and midrange more clean.
I like "crispy sound" and it all just seems more dynamic!
I've also been tube rolling, the best tubes that I have tried are GE 6sn7 and russian 6h8c. Ge sound warmer, the russian great midrange.
I would love to try Amperex or Philips, they are my favorit brands, but unfortunately I ain't got any!
Try more uf and PIO, you won't regret it!!!!!
Best regards
Blackieheil
I've replaced the original caps with these:Russian PIO Capacitor K40Y-9 0.68 uF 400V
2x 22uf and 4x 68uf, a couple of months ago, and it sound great!
Somehow the sound is much better, the bass is tighter and midrange more clean.
I like "crispy sound" and it all just seems more dynamic!
I've also been tube rolling, the best tubes that I have tried are GE 6sn7 and russian 6h8c. Ge sound warmer, the russian great midrange.
I would love to try Amperex or Philips, they are my favorit brands, but unfortunately I ain't got any!
Try more uf and PIO, you won't regret it!!!!!
Best regards
Blackieheil
I've run my CFs in a place to operate on a slightly curved part of its characteristics, to get a little amount of 2nd H (like 45 to 50dB down, a point that can sound pleasant to the ear, but not so much you get too much intermodulation distortion products)) to get some "tube flavor". Like a 12AU7 with 130V on the plate, and biased 2 volts negative on the grid.