3 terminal Jung Super Regulator Kit

[pooge]

Several years ago I communicated with Walt Jung by email regarding the conversion of his Super Regulator to 24v operation, which I needed for my Borbely lineamp and Leach phono amp. He was unsure of doing so, since he never tried it, but offerred suggestions. Unfortunately, I didn't act on them at the time, because I thought complete boards with the preregulator and 825 amp layout might appear. Then, I lost my emails from Walt after a hardrive crash. Last week I decided to look into resurecting the project, and lo and behold, came upon this site and timely thread.

Andy, I noticed on your site that you mentioned a use for 24v supplies. Wondering if you did this with the Super Regulator topology.

Anyhow, my searching led me to several boards other than the Old Colony ones for the original Jung regulators from '95 (can't believe they don't have updates with preregulators yet!)

Borbely offers 24v regulators (EB 802/243), but not with the floating preregulators and other tweaks that the Super Regulators have. He also uses an FET for the pass transistor, which I fail to understand. All in all, not what I want to pay such a high price for, and then have to pay $20 in addition for the parts list! For anyone interested, here are some links to those regulators:

See figure 6 on this page:

http://www.borbelyaudio.com/index8.htm

Click through the download links to see data sheet for the Borbely regulators from this US distributor:

http://www.audiokits.com/products.as...ils&prodid=393

I also found a board with a 15v Sulzer/Borbely topology with preregulators (not floating) at this site, but today I couldn't get through to the links to the schematic and board pictures:

http://hitechnetworks.net/bwaldron/a..._regulator.htm

[ALW]

However, to conclude the measured superiority translates reliably into subjectively percieved superiority is arrogant. Further, considering the usual limitations posed by the use and implementation of "normal" 3-pin 78XX/79XX/317/337 et alstyle reg chips, replacing them with a 3-Pin Jung/Sulzer reg is unlikely to give much of an improvement.

I didn't actually claim that, my point was simply that unless the regulator is working impeccably, the benefits will not be realised.

Now IF the Jung/Sulzer reg where implemented with remote sensing and suitable ground layout there may be more of a point. But to make a 3-pin (78XX/79XX compatible PCB for the Jung/Sulzer reg is to throw away most of the technical benefits (or not) of that design.

That's untrue, you are now making the assumption that the more obvious regulator parameters (impedance etc) are the major issue - they're not.

What does "very low" noise, and "good" line rejection mean, relative to the specifications of a modern 3-pin, or 5-pin (there, I said a bad word, I know) regulator? Not to mention "far wider".

Very low = the noise of the error ampa s being dominant (10's nV / rt Hz) 3 terminals are 100's nv/rt Hz

Good = >130dB at LF, about 90dB at HF (3 terminals are 80dB max at LF)

Bandwidth - depends what you want to define as your limits, but impedance = 60uOhm at LF, rising to 1mOhm circa 100k.

Other parameters defined above.

Output Impedance vs Frequency

Thanks to Jan Didden for the above.

Andy.

P.S.

First, the assumption is that foot tapping to a certain type of music makes a good syste

You will have noted I mentioned other criteria too - the point being that emotional involvement in music, however it comes is fundamental - the other stuff is icing on the cake (imaging etc). Let's face it, we don't judge a guitarist by where he stands on the stage

[fmak]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PMiczek
[B]

And when did you first start noticing this about engineers? (LOL)

-------------------------------------------------------

As an engineer, though not electronics, I sometimes find these threads overbearing. The original questions are often not addressed, and the arguments go on and on. In this case, we are still on about the Jung regulator of considerable vintage. Nothing about the new breed of micropower regulators like the LT1761-1764. I ordered a batch and couldn't get the 300 mA SMT 8 to work properly using an adaptor (hum) but the TO22O 1.5A one worked beautifully, with 40 uV noise using 100 uF output cap and 15 uV with 2200 uF cap!. At $3 a go, this has to be worth it. Pity that manufacturers rarely give you the whole spec such as output impedance etc.

Anyone with similar experience on the SMT verssion? I suspect it is the thin traces on the adaptor , and contact resistance. Threre is 400 uV of 50 Hz I couldn't get rid off.

[peranders]

Originally posted by Elso Kwak

Hi Andy..
I realise my way of working is totally different from most engineers.
I try to gauge my ears regulary on a life concert but NOT pop!!! Sorry I get sick and almost have to vomit after a hour at these extreme high listening levels and distortion. It is the most severe punishment you can think of for me.

Why don't you do like I: I use earplugs which I trim for best frequency response. Rolling Stones and David Bowie sounded excellent! Pink Floyd sounded excellent without earplugs. The concert a couple a years ago at Ullevi Göteborg (>50 k people), was my best consert experience ever

[peranders]

Originally posted by pooge
He also uses an FET for the pass transistor, which I fail to understand.....

Mr Borbely JFET's and MOSFET's. That's the simple explaination.

Advantage with a MOSFET is no power to drive it in "steady state".

[ALW]

Pooge,

24V is easy - 680R / 1k8 for feedback divider (gives 25V nom).

Just choose suitably rated caps!

The output voltage is calculated from the following formula: -
Vout = Vref * (1+R8/R9).

Additionally R8 // R9 (the impedance of the two resistors in parallel) should equal 500 Ohms.

To make this easier the following formula has been derived: -
R9 = (500 * Vout) / (Vout – Vref)

Once the above is calculated, apply the value obtained above to the following formula: -
R8 = R9 * ((Vout – Vref) / Vref)

The two values then can be selected from the closest standard value, or made up from parallel / series combinations.

Andy.

P.S. A FET has an order of magnitude disadvantage in these reg's as the pass device.

[ALW]

before the knives get draw

The graph above has an impedance rise at LF, this is due to the inadequate value of coupling cap used to couple the error signal into the reg. and not the reg. itself.

As an engineer, though not electronics, I sometimes find these threads overbearing. The original questions are often not addressed, and the arguments go on and on.

I actually agree with you on this. All I ever do is present my experiences, sometimes, as with power supplies, I cannot disclose all of the facts I'm aware of due to various political / commercial arrangements and the fact that so far the knowledge I have would not seem to be public domain.

But I do give plenty of clues for those that care to look, and really try to encourage people to both approach things in a detailed rigorous engineering fashion, but then to use their ears.

In audio the latter is critical and fundamental and also easy to get wrong, on first impressions. I also strongly encourage you all to think outside of conventional wisdom.

The Jung reg's are old, but I've only heard one alternative that outperforms them at present. In all likelihood there's lots of alternatives, supported by my view that topology is often the least critical element, just correct implementation of that topology.

Arguing mine's better than yours is probably specious, but I'm happy for people to copy my design (that includes, by necessity, the PCB) and compare to alternative topologies.

The Jung reg's, to this day, do things that many of the alternative topologies do not - I've tried loads, and barring one circuit I'm working with now, and in all likelihood some of Jonathan Carr's excellent posts, there's little to better it.

I've never used a circuit insensitive to power supplies, but would be happy to have one shown to me.

I am, despite what may seem to be the case, about the most open-minded person I know and always willing to learn - so teach me stuff

One thing I personally have noted however, is that in "audio" circuits regulators that can sink current as well as source it (Shunt regulators, Bipolar Output Regs such as I proposed) offer often quite material improvements in sound over pretty good quality "series" regulators such the LT1085/1033, something I have also found in CMOS in digital circuits.

I'm sure this is true, but have you tried the same by effectively pre-loading the regulator output, in low current circuits this is a more elegant, lower cost approach, with a small penalty in dissipation?

Push-pull output stages can bring about effects that I know would be sonically detrimental unless ideally implemented. I'm sure a shunt / supershunt would work well, but am less convinced that many could build a push-pull series reg that would work as well.

Andy.

[peranders]

Originally posted by ALW
P.S. A FET has an order of magnitude disadvantage in these reg's as the pass device.

I could image that lower gm is one thing and another is much high caps so "garbage" leaks over to the regulated side easier.

[ThorstenL]

Koinichiwa,

Originally posted by ALW
have you tried the same by effectively pre-loading the regulator output, in low current circuits this is a more elegant, lower cost approach, with a small penalty in dissipation?

Yes. I generally pre-load 3-pin's wherever I use them. I tend to use LM317/337 as pre-regulators and I prefer to use very low value resistors in the voltage divider setting the output voltage. This serves to "pre-load" these. For all other position I prefer to use the LM/TL431 as simple shunt, with optimised bypassing, giving a wideband, non-reactive PSU line with low but not excessively low impedance.

Unless of course I use Valve Circuits (which I mostly do) and where I do not use any regulation, just loads of chokes and Film Cap's... (or 'lytics if it is the LT)

Originally posted by ALW
Push-pull output stages can bring about effects that I know would be sonically detrimental unless ideally implemented.

In some experiments I found driving the PSU Pin's of Op-Amp's from the same type Op-Amp (which is a "Push-Pull Reg") with NO capacitance in the PSU line (this does take very TIGHT, three-dimensional layouting to work) sounded probably as good as Batteries with Filmcap only bypassing (Siemens naked chip stacked film MKT's).

I don't know if that qualifies as "ideally implemented", but it sure works well.

Sayonara

[janneman]

Originally posted by Kuei Yang Wang
Koinichiwa,

[snip]In some experiments I found driving the PSU Pin's of Op-Amp's from the same type Op-Amp (which is a "Push-Pull Reg&quot with NO capacitance in the PSU line (this does take very TIGHT, three-dimensional layouting to work) sounded probably as good as Batteries with Filmcap only bypassing (Siemens naked chip stacked film MKT's).[snip
Sayonara

Sayonara, this is exactly the info I was looking for. I even started a new tread (local regulator). Can you give me some more info pls?

Jan Didden