diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Analogue Source (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/)
-   -   NAD PP2 circuit diagram / schematics (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/analogue-source/68371-nad-pp2-circuit-diagram-schematics.html)

Werner 22nd November 2005 07:35 AM

NAD PP2 circuit diagram / schematics
 
2 Attachment(s)
Hi all,

months ago I reverse-engineered an NAD PP-2. Here is the conceptual diagram. Note that abstraction has been made of the actual semiconductors, and that the passives numbering does not match that on the PCB.

It is essentially a PP-1 with an MC headamp added to it. Note the copious use of elcaps for coupling. Also note that total MC gain is about 58dB, as opposed to the promised 60dB.

analog_sa 22nd November 2005 08:02 AM

Quote:

Note the copious use of elcaps for coupling

Sickening indeed. If something sells cheap it absolutely needs to be nasty. Lots of free ways to avoid C18/16 but why make the effort?!
And C1? Either paranoia or a really bad opamp.

Thanks for making the effort to publish this. It's nice to know what people mean when they say they like the PP2.

Franz G 22nd November 2005 08:52 AM

... since I built a phonoclone and a VSPS, I have just one word for the PP2, I used before:

Absolutely junk! Cheap but not worth the money. Makes you thinking, CD's are definitely better than vinyl.

Franz

ravon 22nd November 2005 11:08 AM

... since I have a PP2 which seems to do a fair job (although I have not paid the PP2 yet), reading this topic makes me wonder if it is worthwhile making the effort building a VSPS or if it would be better to invest in a better design or if it may be best to simply pay the PP2.

Just saying that the PP2 is a piece of junk is so easy. Could you elaborate on the differences in sound between a PP2 and a VSPS?

Franz G 22nd November 2005 12:09 PM

Quote:

Could you elaborate on the differences in sound between a PP2 and a VSPS?
My english is not good enough, I fear.

Let's try: the PP2 has no dynamics, bad bass, weak mids, no highs compared to the VSPS or phonoclone.

I used it with a Shure V15-III and a Denon DL103.

My recommendation: build a VSPS!

Kind regards
Franz

ravon 22nd November 2005 12:40 PM

I'm afraid your english is good enough for me to understand what you mean ;)

I guess I'll have to find some time to build that VSPS. Let's see...

Werner 23rd November 2005 01:43 PM

Another example of how to make (relatively) good sound with less components (than the PP-2) was the LFD / Mistral basic phonostage (LFD MM0): MM and MC with just one 5534 per channel and shared 7812/7912s, no less.

http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/trigon_e.html

analog_sa 23rd November 2005 02:04 PM

The sad part is that NAD obviously knew how to make a decent phono stage 20 years ago. And it wasn't even high-end :) Some of their integrateds (3150?) had a very nice sounding phono stage (MM). It used a discrete opamp - Jfet diff input and another 4-5 bipolars and discrete PS regulators. At the time i built a clone using reasonable quality parts - the original parts were indeed horrendous - and quality wise it was easily as good as a Pass Ono. So much for progress.

Cobra2 23rd November 2005 02:27 PM

PP1
 
2 Attachment(s)
Cheap ****...

Arne K

Cobra2 23rd November 2005 02:34 PM

3020 riaa
 
2 Attachment(s)
"classic-NAD"

Arne K


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:52 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2